Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 9 March 2018 — Recordati Orphan Drugs v EUIPO — Laboratorios Normon (NORMOSANG)
(Case T‑103/17)
(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark NORMOSANG — Earlier national word mark NORMON — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) — Rule 19(2)(a)(ii) and Rule 20(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 (now Article 7(2)(a)(ii) and Article 8(1) and (7) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/1430))
1. Judicial proceedings — Application initiating proceedings — Formal requirements — Brief summary of the pleas in law on which the application is based — Pleas in law not set out in the application — Reference to elements in an annex — Inadmissibility
(Statute of the Court of Justice, Arts 21 and 53, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Arts 76(d), 171 and 177(1))
(see para. 24)
2. EU trade mark — Appeals procedure — Action before the EU judicature — Jurisdiction of the General Court — Re-evaluation of the facts in the light of evidence produced for the first time before it — Not included
(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 65)
(see paras 26, 27)
3. EU trade mark — Observations of third parties and opposition — Facts, evidence and observations submitted in support of the opposition — Proof of the existence, validity and scope of the protection of an earlier registered trade mark — Purposive interpretation — Renewal certificate sufficient as proof — Conditions
(Commission Regulation No 2868/95, rule 19(2)(a)(ii))
(see para. 41)
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 — Word marks NORMOSANG and NORMON
(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paras 49, 59, 66, 73, 80, 91-93)
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 — Criteria for assessment
(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paras 55, 56, 64, 65, 70)
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 — Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark — Criteria for assessment — Coexistence of two marks on a given market
(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paras 85-89)
Re:
| Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 November 2016 (Case R 831/2016-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Laboratorios Normon and Recordati Orphan Drugs. |
Operative part
The Court:
2. | | Orders Recordati Orphan Drugs to pay the costs. |