Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) of 9 September 2020 – Novomatic v EUIPO – Brouwerij Haacht (PRIMUS)

(Case T‑669/19)

(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for European Union word mark PRIMUS – Earlier EU word mark PRIMUS – Earlier Benelux word mark PRIMUS – Relative ground for refusal – Damage to reputation – Article 8(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

| 1. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark enjoying a reputation – Protection of the well-known earlier mark extended to dissimilar goods or services – Conditions – Reputation of the mark in the Member State or the EU – Meaning – Criteria for assessment  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(5))  (see paras 21, 22, 50-52, 57-59, 88, 89) |

| 2. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark enjoying a reputation – Protection of the well-known earlier mark extended to dissimilar goods or services – Word marks Primus and Primus  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(5))  (see paras 23, 41-48, 77, 90, 93, 99, 100, 106, 107) |

| 3. | EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Causes of revocation – Absence of genuine use of a trade mark – Use of the mark in a form differing by elements not altering the distinctive character of the mark – Subject matter and scope of Article 18(1)(a) of Regulation 2017/1001  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 18(1)(a))  (see paras 31-35) |

| 4. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark enjoying a reputation – Protection of the well-known earlier mark extended to dissimilar goods or services – Conditions – Taking unfair advantage of the distinctive character or repute of the earlier mark – Criteria for assessment  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(5))  (see para. 82) |

| 5. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark enjoying a reputation – Protection of the well-known earlier mark extended to dissimilar goods or services – Conditions – Link between the marks – Criteria for assessment  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(5))  (see paras 83-85, 97-99) |

| 6. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark enjoying a reputation – Protection of the well-known earlier mark extended to dissimilar goods or services – Use of the trade mark sought without just grounds – Meaning  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(5))  (see paras 111, 112) |

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 July 2019 (Case R 2528/2018-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Brouwerij Haacht and Novomatic.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Novomatic AG to pay the costs. |

[Top](#document1)