Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 15 February 2023 –  
Mostostal v EUIPO – Polimex – Mostostal (MOSTOSTAL)

(Case T‑684/21) (
[1](#t-ECR_62021TJ0684_INF_EN_01-E0001)
)

(EU trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – EU word mark MOSTOSTAL – Obligation to state reasons – Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)

| 1. | 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  (Art. 296 TFEU; European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 94(1), first sentence)  (see paragraphs 22, 31) |

| 2. | EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Absolute grounds for invalidity – Applicant in bad faith when filing the trade mark application – Criteria for assessment – Taking into account all relevant factors at the time of filing the application for registration – Intention of the applicant  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 52(1)(b))  (see paragraph 23) |

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 30 July 2021 (Case R 2508/2019-5); |

| 2. | Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Mostostal S.A.; |

| 3. | Orders Polimex – Mostostal S.A. to bear its own costs. |

---

(
[1](#c-ECR_62021TJ0684_INF_EN_01-E0001)
) [OJ C 2, 3.1.2022](./../../../legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=OJ:C:2022:002:TOC).

[Top](#document1)