Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) of 16 June 2021 –  
Smiley Miley v EUIPO – Cyrus Trademarks (MILEY CYRUS)

(Case T‑368/20)

(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU word mark MILEY CYRUS – Earlier EU figurative mark CYRUS – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now 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 earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Criteria for assessment  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 17-19) |

| 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 registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Assessment of the likelihood of confusion – Determination of the relevant public – Attention level of the public  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 20) |

| 3. | 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 registered for identical or similar goods or services – Similarity of the marks concerned – Criteria for assessment – Composite mark  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 27, 39, 52-54) |

| 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 registered for identical or similar goods or services – Similarity of the marks concerned – Assessment of the distinctive character of an element of which a trade mark is composed – Distinctive character of a first name and a surname  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 32-34) |

| 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 registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Word mark MILEY CYRUS and figurative mark CYRUS  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 35, 38, 45-47, 57, 59, 63, 65) |

| 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 registered for identical or similar goods or services – Similarity of the marks concerned – Whether conceptual differences may neutralise visual or aural similarities – Conditions  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 60) |

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 April 2020 (Case R 2520/2018-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Cyrus Trademarks and Smiley Miley.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 2 April 2020 (Case R 2520/2018-4); |

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

[Top](#document1)