Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 9 March 2018 — Recordati Orphan Drugs v EUIPO — Laboratorios Normon (NORMOSANG)

(Case T‑103/17)

(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark NORMOSANG — Earlier national word mark NORMON — 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) — Rule 19(2)(a)(ii) and Rule 20(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 (now Article 7(2)(a)(ii) and Article 8(1) and (7) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/1430))

| 1. | Judicial proceedings—Application initiating proceedings—Formal requirements—Brief summary of the pleas in law on which the application is based—Pleas in law not set out in the application—Reference to elements in an annex—Inadmissibility  (Statute of the Court of Justice, Arts 21 and 53, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Arts 76(d), 171 and 177(1))  (see para. 24) |

| 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—Not included  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 65)  (see paras 26, 27) |

| 3. | EU trade mark—Observations of third parties and opposition—Facts, evidence and observations submitted in support of the opposition—Proof of the existence, validity and scope of the protection of an earlier registered trade mark—Purposive interpretation—Renewal certificate sufficient as proof—Conditions  (Commission Regulation No 2868/95, rule 19(2)(a)(ii))  (see para. 41) |

| 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—Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark—Word marks NORMOSANG and NORMON  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 49, 59, 66, 73, 80, 91-93) |

| 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—Criteria for assessment  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 55, 56, 64, 65, 70) |

| 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—Coexistence of two marks on a given market  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 85-89) |

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 November 2016 (Case R 831/2016-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Laboratorios Normon and Recordati Orphan Drugs.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Recordati Orphan Drugs to pay the costs. |

[Top](#document1)