Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 8 November 2023 –  
Liquid Advertising v EUIPO – Liqui.do (Liquid+Arcade)

(Case T‑592/22) (
[1](#t-ECR_62022TJ0592_INF_EN_01-E0001)
)

(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU word mark Liquid+Arcade – Earlier EU figurative mark LIQUI.DO – Relative ground for refusal – No 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 identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of 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 paragraphs 15, 16, 80) |

| 2. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Assessment of the likelihood of confusion – Determination of the relevant public – Level of attention of the public  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paragraph 17) |

| 3. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Refusal to register where there is a relative ground for refusal, even if limited to part of the European Union  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paragraph 22) |

| 4. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Similarity between the goods or services in question – Criteria for assessment – Complementary nature of the goods or services  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paragraphs 24, 31, 33) |

| 5. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Similarity between the marks concerned – Criteria for assessment – Composite mark – Assessment of the distinctive character of an element of a trade mark  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paragraphs 40, 44, 45) |

| 6. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Similarity between the marks concerned – Visual similarity between a figurative mark and a word mark  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paragraph 57) |

| 7. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Word mark Liquid+Arcade and figurative mark LIQUI.DO  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paragraphs 86-89) |

| 8. | EU trade mark – Appeals procedure – Action before the EU judicature – Power of the General Court to alter the contested decision – Limits  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 72(3))  (see paragraph 92) |

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 28 June 2022 (Case R 2231/2021‑2); |

| 2. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |

| 3. | Orders EUIPO to pay the costs. |

---

(
[1](#c-ECR_62022TJ0592_INF_EN_01-E0001)
) [OJ C 424, 7.11.2022](./../../../legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=OJ:C:2022:424:TOC).

[Top](#document1)