Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 16 June 2021 –  
Fidia farmaceutici v EUIPO – Ioulia and Irene Tseti Pharmaceutical Laboratories (HYAL)

(Case T‑215/20)

(EU trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – EU word mark HYAL – Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 59(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) – Absolute ground for refusal – Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation 2017/1001) – Right to be heard – Audi alteram partem rule – Obligation to state reasons – Sound administration and equal treatment – Article 165(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)

| 1. | EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Absolute grounds for invalidity – Marks composed exclusively of signs or indications capable of designating the characteristics of a product or service – Aim – Need to preserve availability  (Council Regulation No 40/94, Arts 7(1)(c) and 51(1)(a))  (see para. 36) |

| 2. | EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Absolute grounds for invalidity – Marks composed exclusively of signs or indications capable of designating the characteristics of a product or service – Concept  (Council Regulation No 40/94, Arts 7(1)(c) and 51(1)(a))  (see para. 37) |

| 3. | EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Absolute grounds for invalidity – Marks composed exclusively of signs or indications capable of designating the characteristics of a product or service – Assessment of the descriptive nature of a sign – Criteria  (Council Regulation No 40/94, Arts 7(1)(c) and 51(1)(a))  (see paras 38, 53, 54) |

| 4. | EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Absolute grounds for invalidity – Registration contrary to Article 7 of Regulation No 40/94 – Relevant date for the examination of an absolute ground for nullity – Date of lodging the application for registration  (Council Regulation No 40/94, Arts 7(1) and 51(1)(a))  (see paras 39, 58) |

| 5. | EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Absolute grounds for invalidity – Marks composed exclusively of signs or indications capable of designating the characteristics of a product or service – Word mark HYAL  (Council Regulation No 40/94, Arts 7(1)(c) and 51(1)(a))  (see paras 63, 69, 71, 76) |

| 6. | EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Absolute grounds for invalidity – Marks composed exclusively of signs or indications capable of designating the characteristics of a product or service – Concept  (Council Regulation No 40/94, Arts 7(1)(c) and 51(1)(a))  (see paras 66-68) |

| 7. | EU trade mark – Procedural provisions – Decisions of the Office – Observance of the rights of the defence – Scope of the principle  (Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 41(2)(a); Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council 2017/1001, Art. 94(1), second sentence)  (see paras 83, 84) |

| 8. | EU trade mark – Procedural provisions – Examination of the facts of the EUIPO’s own motion – Invalidity proceedings concerning absolute grounds for refusal – Examination restricted to the facts, evidence and arguments provided  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Arts 7(1), 59(1)(a) and 95(1))  (see para. 97) |

| 9. | 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; Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council 2017/1001, Art. 94(1), first sentence)  (see para. 111) |

| 10. | 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  (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 2017/1001)  (see paras 112-114) |

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 January 2020 (Case R 613/2019-5), relating to invalidity proceedings between Ioulia and Irene Tseti Pharmaceutical Laboratories and Fidia farmaceutici.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Fidia farmaceutici SpA to pay the costs. |

[Top](#document1)