Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 10 May 2023 –  
Vanhove v EUIPO – Aldi Einkauf (bistro Régent)

(Case T‑437/22) (
[1](#t-ECR_62022TJ0437_INF_EN_01-E0001)
)

(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the EU figurative mark bistro Régent – Earlier national word mark REGENT – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Genuine use of the earlier mark – Article 18(1), second subparagraph, point (a), and Article 47(2) of Regulation 2017/1001 – Form differing in elements which do not alter the distinctive character)

| 1. | EU trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Genuine use – Concept – Interpretation taking into account the ratio legis of Article 47(2) and (3) of Regulation 2017/1001  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, recital 24 and Art. 47(2) and (3); Commission Regulation 2018/625, Art. 10(3))  (see paragraph 23) |

| 2. | EU trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Genuine use – Concept – Criteria for assessment – Requirement for solid and objective evidence  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 47(2) and (3); Commission Regulation 2018/625, Art. 10(3))  (see paragraphs 24-27) |

| 3. | EU trade mark – Procedural provisions – Evidential value of the evidence – Sworn statements  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 97(1)(f))  (see paragraphs 33-35) |

| 4. | EU trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Genuine use – Use during a five year period – Taking into account of evidence relating to use outside of that period  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 47(2) and (3))  (see paragraph 57) |

| 5. | EU trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Genuine use – Use of the mark in a form differing in elements which do not alter the distinctive character of the mark – Subject matter and material scope of Article 18(1)(a) of Regulation 2017/1001 – Examination of whether the distinctive character has been altered  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Arts 18(1)(a) and 47(2) and (3))  (see paragraphs 61, 64, 65) |

| 6. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Criteria for assessment  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paragraphs 72, 73, 136) |

| 7. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Assessment of the likelihood of confusion – Determination of the relevant public – Level of attention of the public  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paragraphs 77, 79) |

| 8. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Similarity between the goods or services concerned – Criteria for assessment  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paragraph 84) |

| 9. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Similarity between the marks concerned – Criteria for assessment – Composite mark – Assessment of the distinctive character of an element of a trade mark  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paragraphs 88, 94-97, 105) |

| 10. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Figurative mark bistro Régent and word mark REGENT  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paragraphs 106, 138, 139) |

| 11. | EU trade mark – Decisions of EUIPO – Legality – Examination by the EU judicature – Criteria  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001)  (see paragraphs 131, 141) |

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Vanhove to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Aldi Einkauf SE & Co. OHG; |

| 3. | Orders the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) to bear its own costs. |

---

(
[1](#c-ECR_62022TJ0437_INF_EN_01-E0001)
) [OJ C 326, 29.8.2022](./../../../legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=OJ:C:2022:326:TOC).

[Top](#document1)