Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 23 September 2020 –  
Osório & Gonçalves v EUIPO – Miguel Torres (in.fi.ni.tu.de)

(Case T‑601/19)

(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the figurative EU trade mark in.fi.ni.tu.de – Earlier national word mark INFINITE – Admissibility of evidence – Genuine use of the earlier mark – Article 47(2) and (3) and Article 95(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Proof of genuine use – Relative grounds for refusal – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001)

| 1. | European Union 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 – Re-examination of the facts in the light of evidence not previously submitted before EUIPO bodies – Precluded  (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 2017/1001, Art. 72)  (see para. 17) |

| 2. | European Union trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Genuine use – Meaning – Criteria for assessment  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 18(1)(2)(b), Art. 47(2) and (3), Art. 58(1)(a); Commission Regulation No 1868/95, Art. 1, Rule 22)  (see paras 37-40, 43-46) |

| 3. | European Union trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Genuine use – Application of the criteria to the case in question  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 47(2) and (3))  (see para. 41) |

| 4. | European Union trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Genuine use – Meaning – Determination of a minimal quantitative use threshold – Precluded  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 47(2) and (3))  (see para. 42) |

| 5. | European Union trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Genuine use – Examination by EUIPO of its own motion – No such examination  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 47(2) and (3), Art. 95(1); Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 57(2); Commission Regulation No 2868/95, Art. 1, Rule 22(2))  (see paras 70-73) |

| 6. | European Union trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the European Union 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 – Risk of confusion with the earlier mark – Assessment of the risk of confusion – Determination of the relevant public – Attention level of the public  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 94-96) |

| 7. | European Union trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the European Union 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 – Risk of confusion with the earlier mark – Figurative mark in.fi.ni.tu.de and word mark INFINITE  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 103, 141, 142) |

| 8. | European Union trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the European Union 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  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 105, 108, 109) |

| 9. | European Union trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the European Union 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 – Coexistence of earlier marks – Recognition of a certain degree of distinctiveness of a national mark  (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b) and 2(a)(ii); European Parliament and Council Directive 2015/2436, Art. 4(1)(b))  (see para. 123) |

| 10. | European Union 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  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001)  (see para. 127) |

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 July 2019 (Case R 1579/2018-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Miguel Torres and Osório & Gonçalves.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Osório & Gonçalves, SA to pay the costs. |

[Top](#document1)