62023TJ1142_INF
Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 15 January 2025 –Enedo v EUIPO – Enedis (ENEDO)
(Case T-1142/23)
(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the EU word mark ENEDO – Earlier EU word mark ENEDIS – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Restriction of the goods and services covered in the trade mark application)
1.
EU trade mark – Appeals procedure – Action before the EU judicature – Limitation of the list of goods and services after the decision of the Board of Appeal – Consequences
(Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 188; European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 49(1))
(see paragraphs 21, 22)
2.
EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Criteria for assessment
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paragraphs 28, 29, 88, 89)
3.
EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Assessment of the likelihood of confusion – Determination of the relevant public – Level of attention of the public
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paragraph 30)
4.
EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Similarity between the marks concerned – Assessment of the distinctive character of an element of a trade mark
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paragraphs 42, 60, 66, 81)
5.
EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Earlier trade mark constituted by an EU trade mark – Refusal to register where there is a relative ground for refusal, even if limited to part of the Union
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paragraph 52)
6.
EU trade mark – Decisions of EUIPO – Principle of equal treatment – Principle of good administration – EUIPO’s previous decision-making practice – Principle of legality
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001)
(see paragraph 58)
7.
EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Word marks ENEDO and ENEDIS
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paragraphs 61, 70, 76, 83, 87, 94, 95)
Operative part
The Court:
1.
Dismisses the action;
2.
Orders Enedo Oyj, in addition to bearing its own costs, to pay those incurred by Enedis;
3.
Orders the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) to bear its own costs.