Language of document :


 


 



Order of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) of 22 November 2022 –
Fieldpoint (Cyprus) v EUIPO (HYPERLIGHTEYEWEAR)

(Case T801/21) (1)

(EU trade mark – Application for the EU word mark HYPERLIGHTEYEWEAR – Absolute ground for refusal – Descriptiveness – Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Equal treatment – Action manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

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 – Aim – Need to preserve availability

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 7(1)(c))

(see paragraph 16)

2.      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 – Definition – Mark composed of a word or neologism resulting from a combination of elements

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 7(1)(c))

(see paragraphs 17-19, 25)

3.      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 – Assessment of the descriptive nature of a sign – Criteria

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 7(1)(c))

(see paragraph 20)

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 – Word mark HYPERLIGHTEYEWEAR

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 7(1)(c))

(see paragraphs 26, 29, 30, 32, 35)

5.      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 – Assessment by EUIPO of registrability – Production of evidence – Not required

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 7(1)(c))

(see paragraph 28)

6.      EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Refusal of registration based on one of the absolute grounds for refusal set out in Article 7(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 – Whether sufficient

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 7(1))

(see paragraph 37)

7.      EU trade mark – Decisions of EUIPO – Principle of equal treatment – Principle of sound administration – EUIPO’s previous decision-making practice – Principle of legality – Need for a stringent and full examination in each individual case

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001)

(see paragraph 44)

Operative part

1.

The action is dismissed.

2.

Fieldpoint (Cyprus) LTD shall pay the costs.


1 OJ C 73, 14.2.2022.