Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 3 September 2015 —
iNET24 Holding v OHIM (IDIRECT24)
(Case T‑225/14)
Community trade mark — International registration designating the European Community — Word mark IDIRECT24 — Absolute ground for refusal — Lack of distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Obligation to state reasons — Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009
1. Community trade mark — Procedural provisions — Statement of reasons for decisions — Article 75, first sentence, of Regulation No 207/2009 — Scope identical to that of Article 296 TFEU (Art. 296 TFEU; Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 75, first sentence) (see para. 20)
2. Community trade mark — Procedural provisions — Examination of the facts of the Office’s own motion — Scope — No obligation to prove matters within common knowledge (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 76(1)) (see para. 23)
3. Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Absolute grounds for refusal — Marks devoid of any distinctive character — Concept — Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(b)) (see paras 43-45)
4. Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Absolute grounds for refusal — Marks devoid of any distinctive character — Marks constituted of advertising slogans — Distinctive character — Application of specific criteria for assessment — Inadmissibility (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(b)) (see paras 46, 47)
5. Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Absolute grounds for refusal — Marks devoid of any distinctive character — Marks constituted of advertising slogans — Slogan carrying an objective message (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(b)) (see para. 48)
6. Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Absolute grounds for refusal — Marks devoid of any distinctive character — Word mark IDIRECT24 (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(b)) (see paras 51, 75)
7. Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark — Absolute grounds for refusal — Separate examination of the grounds for refusal in relation to each of the goods or services covered by the application for registration — Obligation to state the reasons for refusing to register — Scope (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Arts 7(1)(b), and 75, first sentence) (see paras 66, 67)
Re:
| ACTION brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 4 February 2014 (Case R 1867/2013-5), concerning the international registration designating the European Community of word mark IDIRECT24. |
Operative part
The Court:
2. | | Orders iNET24 Holding AG to pay the costs. |