Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 28 April 2021 –  
FCA Italy v EUIPO – Bettag (Pandem)

(Case T‑191/20)

(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the EU word mark Pandem – Earlier national and international word marks PANDA – Relative ground for refusal – No likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

| 1. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for 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 paras 17, 18, 74-77) |

| 2. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Degree of attention of the relevant public  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 20) |

| 3. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Word marks Pandem and PANDA  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 30, 45, 52, 64, 81) |

| 4. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Similarity between the goods or services in question – Criteria for assessment  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 31) |

| 5. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Similarity of the marks concerned – Criteria for assessment  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 34, 35) |

| 6. | EU trade mark – Decisions of the Office – Principle of equal treatment – Principle of sound administration – EUIPO’s previous decision-making practice – Principle of legality – Need for a strict and complete examination in each particular case  (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 2017/1001)  (see paras 41-43) |

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 February 2020 (Case R 1483/2019-5), relating to opposition proceedings between FCA Italy and Mr Bettag.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders FCA Italy SpA to pay the costs. |

[Top](#document1)