Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 8 May 2019 — Inditex v EUIPO — Ffauf Italia (ZARA)

(Case T‑269/18)

(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark ZARA — Earlier national word and figurative marks LE DELIZIE ZARA and ZARA — Proof of genuine use of the earlier marks — Article 47(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Article 18(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 — Obligation to state reasons)

| 1. | EU trade mark — Observations of third parties and opposition — Examination of the opposition — Proof of use of the earlier mark — Use of the mark in a form differing by elements not altering the distinctive character of the mark  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Arts 18(1), second subpara., (a) and 47(2) and (3))  (see para. 31) |

| 2. | EU trade mark — Procedural provisions — Statement of reasons for decisions — First sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 — Scope identical to that of Article 296 TFEU  (Art. 296 TFEU; European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 94(1), first sentence)  (see para. 34) |

| 3. | Action for annulment — Pleas in law — Infringement of essential procedural requirements — Inadequate statement of reasons — To be considered of the Court’s own motion  (Arts 263 and 296 TFEU)  (see para. 35) |

| 4. | EU trade mark — Observations of third parties and opposition — Examination of the opposition — Proof of use of the earlier mark — Partial use — Effect — Concept of ‘part of the goods or services’ covered by the registration  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 47(2) and (3))  (see paras 65, 66) |

| 5. | Acts of the institutions — Statement of reasons — Obligation — Scope — Correction of an error of reasoning during the proceedings before the Court — Not permissible  (Art. 296 TFEU)  (see para. 71) |

Re

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 February 2018 (Joined Cases R 359/2015-5 and R 409/2015-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Ffauf Italia and Inditex.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 2 February 2018 (Joined Cases R 359/2015-5 and R 409/2015-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Ffauf Italia SA and Industria de Diseño Textil, SA (Inditex), as regards ‘preserved, frozen, dried and cooked fruits and vegetables; jellies, jams, compotes; eggs, milk and milk products; edible oils and fats’ in Class 29 of the Nice Agreement concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks of 15 June 1957, as revised and amended, ‘rice, tapioca, sago, flour and preparations made from cereals, bread, pastry; yeast, baking-powder; salt, mustard; vinegar, sauces (condiments); spices; rice-based snack food’ in Class 30, ‘fresh vegetables’ in Class 31, ‘fresh juices’ in Class 32, ‘retailing and wholesaling in shops, selling via global computer networks, by catalogue, by mail order, by telephone, by radio and television, and via other electronic means of preserved, frozen, dried and cooked vegetables; edible oils, rice, flour and preparations made from cereals, bread, vinegar, sauces (condiments)’ in Class 35 and ‘restaurant services (food), self-service restaurants, cafeterias’ in Class 43; |

| 2. | Orders EUIPO and Ffauf Italia to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by Industria de Diseño Textil (Inditex) in the proceedings before the General Court. |

[Top](#document1)