Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 11 October 2023 –
Dr. Rudolf Liebe Nachfolger v EUIPO – Bit Beauty (ayuna LESS IS BEAUTY)
(Case T‑490/22) (1)
(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – International registration designating the European Union – Figurative mark ayuna LESS IS BEAUTY – Earlier EU word mark AJONA – Relative ground for refusal – No likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
1. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Criteria for assessment
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paragraphs 17, 18, 88)
2. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Similarity between the goods or services in question – Criteria for assessment – Complementary nature of the goods or services
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paragraphs 24, 36)
3. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Figurative mark ayuna LESS IS BEAUTY and word mark AJONA
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paragraphs 32, 40, 53, 63, 83, 97, 98)
4. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Similarity between the marks concerned – Criteria for assessment – Composite mark
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paragraphs 41, 42, 52, 57, 59)
5. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Enhanced distinctiveness of the earlier mark – Proof that a mark is well known – Point in time to be taken into consideration
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paragraphs 71, 72)
6. EU trade mark – Procedural provisions – Probative value of the evidence – Opinion poll
(see paragraph 77)
7. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Weighing elements of similarity or difference between the signs – Taking into account of the intrinsic characteristics of the signs or the conditions in which the goods or services are marketed
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paragraphs 93, 94)
8. EU trade mark – Appeals procedure – Action before the EU judicature – Power of the General Court to alter the contested decision – Limits
(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 72(2) and (3))
(see paragraph 101)
Operative part
The Court:
2. | | Orders Dr. Rudolf Liebe Nachfolger GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs. |