Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 16 March 2022 –  
Laboratorios Ern v EUIPO – Nordesta (APIAL)

(Case T‑315/21) (
[1](#t-ECR_62021TJ0315_INF_EN_01-E0001)
)

(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU word mark APIAL – Earlier EU word mark APIRETAL – Relative ground for refusal – No likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – No damage to reputation – Article 8(5) of Regulation 2017/1001 – Evidence submitted for the first time before the General Court)

| 1. | 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 – Annulment or variation for reasons appearing after judgment was delivered – Precluded  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Arts 72(2) and 95)  (see para. 18) |

| 2. | EU trade mark – Appeals procedure – Action before the EU judicature – Jurisdiction of the General Court – Re-evaluation of the facts in the light of evidence produced for the first time before it – Precluded  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 72; Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 188)  (see para. 19) |

| 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 – Criteria for assessment  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 21, 22, 37) |

| 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. 24) |

| 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 – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Word marks APIAL and APIRETAL  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 29, 35, 42, 43) |

| 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 – Similarity of the marks concerned – Criteria for assessment  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 30) |

| 7. | EU trade mark – Decisions of the Office – Legality – Examination by the EU judicature – Criteria  (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 2017/1001)  (see para. 36) |

| 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 enjoying a reputation – Protection of well-known earlier mark extended to dissimilar goods or services – Conditions – Reputation of the mark in the Member State or the EU – Criteria for assessment  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(5))  (see paras 46, 50) |

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Laboratorios Ern, SA to pay the costs. |

---

(
[1](#c-ECR_62021TJ0315_INF_EN_01-E0001)
) [OJ C 289, 19.7.2021](./../../../legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=OJ:C:2021:289:TOC).

[Top](#document1)