Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 11 October 2023 –  
Flowbird v EUIPO – APCOA Parking Holdings (FLOWBIRD)

(Case T‑296/22) (
[1](#t-ECR_62022TJ0296_INF_EN_01-E0001)
)

(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – International registration designating the European Union – Figurative mark FLOWBIRD – Earlier EU figurative mark FLOW – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) 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 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 20, 113) |

| 2. | 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 in question – Criteria for assessment – Complementary nature of the goods or services  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paragraphs 24-27, 55) |

| 3. | 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 FLOWBIRD  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paragraphs 38, 39, 43, 50, 56, 65, 82-84, 92, 98, 117, 118) |

| 4. | 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 – Determination of the dominant element or elements  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paragraphs 68, 69, 78-80, 106) |

| 5. | EU trade mark – Procedural provisions – Statement of reasons for decisions – Scope  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 94(1))  (see paragraphs 125, 126) |

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Flowbird to pay the costs. |

---

(
[1](#c-ECR_62022TJ0296_INF_EN_01-E0001)
) [OJ C 276, 18.7.2022](./../../../legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=OJ:C:2022:276:TOC).

[Top](#document1)