Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 22 February 2018 — Martín Osete v EUIPO

(Case C‑529/17 P)

(Appeal — Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — EU trade mark — Revocation proceedings — Word mark AN IDEAL WIFE — Declaration of revocation)

| 1. | EU trade mark—Surrender, revocation and invalidity—Causes of revocation—Absence of genuine use of a trade mark—Proof of use of the earlier mark—Genuine use—Concept—Criteria for assessment  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Arts 15(1), second para., (a) and 51(1)(a))  (see para. 6) |

| 2. | Appeal—Grounds—Incorrect assessment of the facts and evidence—Inadmissibility—Review by the Court of the assessment of the facts and evidence—Possible only where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted—Ground of appeal alleging distortion of the clear sense of the evidence—Need to indicate precisely the evidence alleged to have been distorted and show the errors of appraisal which led to that distortion—Requirement for the distortion to be obvious from the documents in the Court’s file  (Art. 256(1) TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para,; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 168(1)(d))  (see para. 6) |

| 3. | EU trade mark—Surrender, revocation and invalidity—Causes of revocation—Absence of genuine use of a trade mark—Concept of ‘proper reasons’ for non-use—Independent and uniform interpretation—Obstacles bearing a direct relation to the trade mark rendering its use unreasonable or impossible and independent of the volition of the trade mark proprietor  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Arts 15(1) and 51(1)(a))  (see para. 6) |

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | The appeal is dismissed in its entirety as being, in part, manifestly inadmissible and, in part, manifestly unfounded. |

| 2. | Ms Isabel Martín Osete shall bear her own costs. |

[Top](#document1)