Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 6 October 2021 –  
Kondyterska korporatsiia “Roshen” v EUIPO – Krasnyj Octyabr (Representation of a lobster)

(Case T‑254/20)

(EU trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – Application for an EU figurative mark representing a lobster – Absolute grounds for refusal – Distinctive character – Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) – No descriptive character – Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation 2017/1001) – Right to be heard – Article 94 of Regulation 2017/1001)

| 1. | Judicial proceedings – Admissibility of actions – Judged by reference to the situation when the application was lodged – Decision replacing the contested decision during the proceedings – Adaptation of initial forms of order sought and pleas in law  (Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 86)  (see paras 22, 23) |

| 2. | EU trade mark – Procedural provisions – Decisions of EUIPO – Observance of the rights of the defence – Scope of the principle  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 94(1), second sentence; Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 41(2)(a))  (see paras 38-40) |

| 3. | EU trade mark – Appeals procedure – Action brought against a decision by the Cancellation Division of EUIPO – Examination by the Board of Appeal – Scope – Evidence submitted for the first time before the Board of Appeal – Account taken – Discretion of the Board of Appeal – Limits  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 95(2); Commission Regulation No 2018/625, Art. 27(4))  (see paras 53-59) |

| 4. | 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 – Criteria  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(c))  (see paras 84-88) |

| 5. | EU trade mark – Procedural provisions – Examination of the facts of EUIPO’s own motion – Invalidity proceedings concerning absolute grounds for refusal – Examination restricted to the facts, evidence and arguments provided – Well-known facts taken into account  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Arts 7, 59, 62 and 95(1))  (see paras 91, 134-136) |

| 6. | 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 – Figurative mark representing a lobster  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 7(1)(c))  (see paras 92, 119, 120) |

| 7. | 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. 104) |

| 8. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Absolute grounds for refusal – Marks devoid of distinctive character – Assessment of distinctive character – Criteria  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(b))  (see paras 114-116) |

| 9. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Absolute grounds for refusal – Marks devoid of distinctive character – Recognition of the distinctive character of the sign not subject to a finding of a specific level of linguistic or artistic creativity or imaginativeness  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(b))  (see para. 117) |

| 10. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Absolute grounds for refusal – Marks devoid of distinctive character – Figurative mark representing a lobster  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(b))  (see paras 122-124, 128) |

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 March 2020 (Case R 1916/2019-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Dochirnie pidpryiemstvo Kondyterska korporatsiia ‘Roshen’ and PAO Moscow Confectionery Factory ‘Krasnyj Octyabr’.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Dochirnie pidpryiemstvo Kondyterska korporatsiia ‘Roshen’ to pay the costs. |

[Top](#document1)