Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 29 September 2016 — Bach Flower Remedies v EUIPO — Durapharma (RESCUE)

(Case T‑337/15)

‛EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark RESCUE — Absolute ground for refusal — Descriptive character — No distinctive character acquired through use — Article 7(1)(c) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Article 52(2) of Regulation No 207/2009’

| 1. | EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark — Absolute grounds for refusal — Marks composed exclusively of signs or indications capable of designating the characteristics of a product or service — Concept (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(c)) (see paras 16, 17) |

| 2. | EU trade mark — Surrender, revocation and invalidity — Absolute grounds for invalidity — Registration contrary to Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009 — Word mark RESCUE (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(c)) (see paras 20-42, 47) |

| 3. | 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 (see paras 44, 45) |

| 4. | EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark — Absolute grounds for refusal — Trade marks which are devoid of distinctive character, descriptive or commonplace — Exception — Distinctive character acquired through use — Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(3)) (see paras 54, 55) |

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 March 2015 (Case R 2551/2013-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between Durapharma and Bach Flower Remedies.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Bach Flower Remedies Ltd to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO). |

[Top](#document1)