Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 6 October 2021 –  
Dermavita Company v EUIPO – Allergan Holdings France (JUVEDERM)

(Case T‑372/20)

(EU trade mark – Revocation proceedings – EU word mark JUVEDERM – Genuine use of the mark – Use in connection with the goods in respect of which the mark is registered – Use with the consent of the proprietor – Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

| 1. | 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 – Recourse by the Board of Appeal to implicit reasoning – Whether permissible – Conditions  (Art. 296 TFEU; European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 94(1), first sentence)  (see paras 16, 17) |

| 2. | EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Causes of revocation – No genuine use of the trade mark – Proof of use – Genuine use – Concept – Criteria for assessment  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Arts 15(1) and 51(1)(a); Commission Regulation No 2868/95, Rules 22(3) and 40(5))  (see para. 29) |

| 3. | EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Causes of revocation – No genuine use of the trade mark – Word mark JUVEDERM  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Arts 15(1), first para., and 51(1)(a))  (see paras 36, 45, 51, 55, 61, 62) |

| 4. | EU trade mark – Lodging of application for EU trade mark – Identification of the goods or services concerned by the trade mark – Use of the general indications in the headings of the classes of the Nice classification – Scope  (Commission Regulation No 2868/95, Art. 1, Rule 2(2) and (4))  (see para. 54) |

| 5. | EU trade mark – Lodging of application for EU trade mark – Identification of the goods or services concerned by the trade mark – Requirements of clarity and precision – Determination, by the competent authorities and the economic operators, of the extent of the protection conferred by the trade mark  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 26(1)(c); Commission Regulation No 2868/95, Art. 1, Rule 2(2))  (see para. 56) |

| 6. | 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  (see para. 60) |

| 7. | EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Causes of revocation – Absence of genuine use of a trade mark – Use by a third party with the consent of the trade mark proprietor  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 15(2))  (see paras 66, 67) |

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 April 2020 (Case R 877/2019-4), relating to revocation proceedings between Dermavita Company and Allergan Holdings France.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Dermavita Company S.a.r.l. to pay the costs of the present proceedings. |

[Top](#document1)