Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) of 10 March 2021 –  
Hauz 1929 v EUIPO – Houzz (HAUZ NEW YORK)

(Case T‑67/20)

(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the EU figurative mark HAUZ NEW YORK – Earlier EU word mark HOUZZ – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) 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 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 paras 16, 17, 58) |

| 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 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  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 18) |

| 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 – Figurative marks HAUZ NEW YORK and HOUZZ  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 24, 25, 37, 42, 47, 68-72) |

| 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 of the marks concerned – Criteria for assessment  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 26, 27) |

| 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 – Similarity of the marks concerned – Criteria for assessment – Composite mark  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 28, 34, 40) |

| 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 – Distinctiveness or reputation of the earlier mark – Effect  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 48, 49, 59) |

| 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 – Weighing elements of similarity or difference between the signs – Taking into account of the intrinsic characteristics of the signs or the conditions in which the goods or services are marketed  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 60, 61) |

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 November 2019 (Case R 886/2019-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Houzz and Hauz 1929.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Hauz 1929 Ltd to pay the costs. |

[Top](#document1)