Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 24 November 2021 –  
Jeronimo Martins Polska v EUIPO – Rivella International (Riviva)

(Case T‑551/20)

(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the EU word mark Riviva – Earlier EU word mark RIVELLA – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Partial rejection of the application for registration – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) – Proof of genuine use of the earlier mark – Article 42(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 47(2) of Regulation 2017/1001))

| 1. | EU trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Genuine use – Definition – Interpretation taking account of the rationale of Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Recital 10, Art. 42(2) and (3); Commission Regulation No 2868/95, Art. 1, Rule 22(3))  (see para. 23) |

| 2. | EU trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Genuine use – Definition – Criteria for assessment – Requirement of solid and objective evidence  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 42(2) and (3); Commission Regulation No 2868/95, Art. 1, Rule 22(3))  (see paras 24-27) |

| 3. | EU trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Genuine use – Definition – Criteria for assessment – Territorial extent of the use  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Arts 15(1) and 42(2))  (see para. 37) |

| 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 – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Criteria for assessment  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 52, 53, 84) |

| 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 – 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. 55) |

| 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 between the goods or services in question – Criteria for assessment  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 59) |

| 7. | EU trade mark – Decisions of EUIPO – Principle of equal treatment – Principle of sound administration – EUIPO’s previous decision-making practice – Principle of legality  (Council Regulation No 207/2009)  (see paras 79, 80) |

| 8. | 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 marks Riviva and RIVELLA  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 85-88) |

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 1 July 2020 (Case R 2420/2019-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Rivella International and Jeronimo Martins Polska.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Jeronimo Martins Polska S.A. to pay the costs. |

[Top](#document1)