Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 11 July 2017 —  
Dogg Label v EUIPO — Chemoul (JAPRAG)

(Case T‑406/16)

(EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark JAPRAG — Earlier national figurative mark JAPAN-RAG — Relative ground for refusal — Similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

| 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  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 21, 23) |

| 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  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 22) |

| 3. | EU trade mark — Surrender, revocation and invalidity — Relative grounds for invalidity — Existence of an identical or similar earlier mark registered for identical or similar goods or services — Word mark JAPRAG and figurative mark JAPAN-RAG  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Arts 8(1)(b), and 52(1)(a))  (see paras 25, 27, 37, 39, 55, 64, 75, 78) |

| 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  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 44) |

| 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 — Visual similarity between a figurative mark and a word mark  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 49) |

| 6. | EU trade mark — Appeals procedure — Action before the EU judicature — Power of the General Court to alter the contested decision — Limits  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 65(3))  (see para. 81) |

| 7. | 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 — Not included  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 65(2))  (see para. 87) |

| 8. | EU trade mark — Appeals procedure — Action before the EU judicature — Jurisdiction of the General Court — Direction issued to the Office — Not included  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 65(6))  (see para. 89) |

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 13 May 2016 (Case R 2336/2015-2), relating to invalidity proceedings between Dogg Label and Mr Chemoul.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 13 May 2016 (Case R 2336/2015-2); |

| 2. | Orders Dogg Label, EUIPO and Mr Patrick Chemoul to bear their own respective costs. |

[Top](#document1)