Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 7 December 2022 –  
Puma v EUIPO – Vaillant (Puma)

(Case T‑623/21) (
[1](#t-ECR_62021TJ0623_INF_EN_01-E0001)
)

(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU word mark Puma – Earlier EU figurative mark PUMA – Relative ground for refusal – Damage to reputation – Article 8(5) 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 enjoying a reputation – Extension of protection of earlier mark with a reputation to dissimilar goods or services – Aim  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(5))  (see paragraph 19) |

| 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 enjoying a reputation – Extension of protection of earlier mark with a reputation to dissimilar goods or services – Conditions – Link between the marks – Criteria for assessment  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(5))  (see paragraphs 20-23, 41, 67, 68, 80) |

| 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 enjoying a reputation – Extension of protection of earlier mark with a reputation to dissimilar goods or services – Conditions – Taking unfair advantage of the distinctive character or repute of the earlier mark – Detriment to the distinctive character or repute of the earlier mark – Relevant public  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(5))  (see paragraphs 27, 29, 36) |

| 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 enjoying a reputation – Extension of protection of earlier mark with a reputation to dissimilar goods or services – Word mark Puma and figurative mark Puma  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(5))  (see paragraphs 38, 43, 52, 59, 77, 100, 114, 120, 122) |

| 5. | EU trade mark – Appeals procedure – Action before the EU judicature – Power of the General Court to alter the contested decision – Limits – Limited to manifest errors of assessment  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 72(3))  (see paragraph 42) |

| 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 enjoying a reputation – Extension of protection of earlier mark with a reputation to dissimilar goods or services – Conditions – Similarity of the marks concerned – Degree of similarity required  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b) and 7(5))  (see paragraphs 45, 46) |

| 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 enjoying a reputation – Extension of protection of earlier mark with a reputation to dissimilar goods or services – Conditions – Reputation of the mark in the Member State or in the European Union – Concept – Criteria for assessment  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(5))  (see paragraphs 53, 61) |

| 8. | EU trade mark – Appeals procedure – Action before the EU judicature – Jurisdiction of the General Court – Review of the lawfulness of decisions of the Boards of Appeal – Re-examination of the facts in the light of evidence not previously submitted before EUIPO bodies – Precluded  (Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 188; European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 72)  (see paragraph 95) |

| 9. | EU trade mark – Procedural provisions – Statement of reasons for decisions – First sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 – Scope identical to that of Article 296 TFEU – Recourse by the Board of Appeal to implicit reasoning – Whether permissible – Conditions  (Art. 296 TFEU; European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 94(1), first sentence)  (see paragraph 107) |

| 10. | EU trade mark – Decisions of EUIPO – Principle of equal treatment – Principle of sound administration – EUIPO's previous decision-making practice – Principle of legality – Need for a stringent and full examination in each particular case  (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 2017/1001)  (see paragraphs 108-110) |

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Puma SE to pay the costs. |

---

(
[1](#c-ECR_62021TJ0623_INF_EN_01-E0001)
) [OJ C 471, 22.11.2021](./../../../legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=OJ:C:2021:471:TOC).

[Top](#document1)