Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 6 April 2022 –  
Agora Invest v EUIPO – Transportes Maquinaria y Obras (TRAMOSA)

(Case T‑219/21) (
[1](#t-ECR_62021TJ0219_INF_EN_01-E0001)
)

(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU figurative mark TRAMOSA – Earlier EU figurative mark TRAMO,SA TRANSPORTE MAQUINARIA Y OBRAS,S.A. – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) – Genuine use of the earlier mark – Article 15(1), second subparagraph, point (a) and Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 18(1), second subparagraph, point (a) and Article 47(2) and (3) of Regulation 2017/1001) – Form differing in elements which do not alter the distinctive character)

| 1. | EU trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Genuine use – Use of the mark in a form differing by elements not altering the distinctive character of the mark – Subject matter and material scope of Article 15(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009 – Examination of alteration of distinctive character  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Arts 15(1), second para. (a) and 42(2) and (3))  (see paras 22-24) |

| 2. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Assessment of the registrability of a sign – EU rules only taken into account  (Council Regulation No 207/2009)  (see para. 41) |

| 3. | EU trade mark – Decisions of EUIPO – Legality – Examination by the EU judicature – Criteria  (Council Regulation No 207/2009)  (see para. 45) |

| 4. | EU trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Genuine use – Concept – Criteria for assessment – Requirement of solid and objective evidence  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 42(2) and (3))  (see paras 50-53, 56, 57) |

| 5. | EU trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Genuine use – Application of the criteria to the case in question  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 43(2) and (3))  (see paras 54, 55) |

| 6. | 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  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 74, 75, 119) |

| 7. | 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 – Assessment of the likelihood of confusion – Determination of the relevant public – Attention level of the public  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 76-78) |

| 8. | 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 – Figurative marks TRAMOSA and TRAMO,SA TRANSPORTE MAQUINARIA Y OBRAS,S.A.  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 84, 92, 99, 124, 125) |

| 9. | 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  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 85) |

| 10. | 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 – Composite mark – Assessment of the distinctive character of an element of which a trade mark is composed  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 93, 95-98) |

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Agora Invest, SA to pay the costs. |

---

(
[1](#c-ECR_62021TJ0219_INF_EN_01-E0001)
) [OJ C 228, 14.6.2021](./../../../legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=OJ:C:2021:228:TOC).

[Top](#document1)