Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 25 April 2018 –  
Romantik Hotels & Restaurants v EUIPO — Hotel Preidlhof (ROMANTIK)

(Case T‑213/17)

(EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark ROMANTIK — Absolute ground for refusal — No distinctive character — No distinctive character acquired through use — Article 7(1)(b) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

| 1. | EU trade mark—Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark—Absolute grounds for refusal—Marks devoid of any distinctive character—Assessment of distinctive character—Criteria  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(b))  (see paras 16-18) |

| 2. | EU trade mark—Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark—Absolute grounds for refusal—Marks devoid of any distinctive character—Marks constituted of advertising slogans—Distinctive character—Application of specific criteria for assessment—Not permissible  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(b))  (see paras 19, 20) |

| 3. | EU trade mark—Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark—Absolute grounds for refusal—Marks devoid of any distinctive character—Marks constituted of advertising slogans—Slogan with a fantasy character  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(b))  (see para. 21) |

| 4. | EU trade mark—Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark—Absolute grounds for refusal—Marks devoid of any distinctive character—Marks constituted of advertising slogans—Flattering promotional formula  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(b))  (see para. 22) |

| 5. | EU trade mark—Surrender, revocation and invalidity—Absolute grounds for invalidity—Registration contrary to Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/20091—Word mark ROMANTIK  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(b))  (see paras 25, 31, 34) |

| 6. | EU trade mark—Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark—Assessment of the registrability of a sign—EU rules only taken into account—Earlier registration of the mark in certain Member States or third countries—Decisions not binding EU bodies  (Council Regulation No 207/2009)  (see para. 39) |

| 7. | EU trade mark—Decisions of the Office—Principle of equal treatment—Principle of sound administration—EUIPO’s previous decision-making practice  (Council Regulation No 207/2009)  (see para. 41) |

| 8. | EU trade mark—Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark—Absolute grounds for refusal—Marks devoid of any distinctive character—Exception—Distinctive character acquired through use—Criteria for assessment  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(3))  (see paras 45-50) |

| 9. | EU trade mark—Appeals procedure—Action before the EU judicature—Legality of a decision issued by EUIPO’s Board of Appeal adjudicating in invalidity proceeding—Challenged by the adducing of new facts—Not permissible  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 65)  (see para. 60) |

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 February 2017 (Case R 1257/2016-4), concerning invalidity proceedings between Hotel Preidlhof and Romantik Hotels & Restaurants.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Romantik Hotels & Restaurants AG to pay the costs. |

[Top](#document1)