Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 29 May 2018 –  
Sata v EUIPO — Zhejiang Rongpeng Air Tools (2000)

(Case T‑301/17)

(EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark 2000 — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — Article 52(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 59(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation 2017/1001) — Equal treatment — Principle of sound administration — Obligation to state reasons)

| 1. | EU trade mark—Appeals procedure—Action before the EU judicature—Legality of a decision issued by EUIPO’s Board of Appeal adjudicating in invalidity proceeding—Challenged by the adducing of new facts—Not permissible—Account taken, for the purposes of interpreting EU law, of EU national or international case-law not cited before the EUIPO bodies—Lawfulness  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 65)  (see para. 20) |

| 2. | EU trade mark—Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark—Absolute grounds for refusal—Marks composed exclusively of signs or indications capable of designating the characteristics of a product or service—Aim—Need to preserve availability  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(c))  (see para. 28) |

| 3. | EU trade mark—Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark—Absolute grounds for refusal—Marks composed exclusively of signs or indications capable of designating the characteristics of a product or service—Meaning—Sign composed exclusively of numerals  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(c))  (see paras 29-33) |

| 4. | EU trade mark—Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark—Absolute grounds for refusal—Marks composed exclusively of signs or indications capable of designating the characteristics of a product or service—Assessment of the descriptive nature of a sign—Criteria  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(c))  (see para. 34) |

| 5. | EU trade mark—Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark—Absolute grounds for refusal—Marks composed exclusively of signs or indications capable of designating the characteristics of a product or service—Word mark 2000  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(c))  (see paras 36, 37, 39, 41-49) |

| 6. | EU trade mark—Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark—Absolute grounds for refusal—Overlapping of the scope of the grounds set out in Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(b) and (c))  (see para. 53) |

| 7. | EU trade mark—Decisions of the Office—Principle of equal treatment—Principle of sound administration—EUIPO’s previous decision-making practice—Principle of legality—Need for a strict and complete examination in each particular case  (Council Regulation No 207/2009)  (see paras 58-60) |

| 8. | EU trade mark—Procedural provisions—Statement of reasons for decisions—Article 75, first sentence, of Regulation No 207/2009—Scope identical to that of Article 296 TFEU  (Art. 296 TFEU; Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 75, first sentence)  (see paras 65-67) |

| 9. | Actions for annulment—Pleas in law—Lack of or inadequate statement of reasons—Separate ground from the one concerning substantive legality  (Art. 296 TFEU)  (see para. 68) |

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 March 2017 (Case R 651/2016-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Zhejiang Rongpeng Air Tools and Sata.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Sata GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs. |

[Top](#document1)