EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62022TA0665

Case T-665/22: Judgment of the General Court of 8 November 2023 — SkinIdent v EUIPO — Beiersdorf (NIVEA SKIN-IDENTICAL Q10) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark NIVEA SKIN-IDENTICAL Q10 — National trade mark and international registration of earlier word mark SKINIDENT — Earlier company name Skinident — Relative grounds for refusal — Absence of a likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Use in trade of a sign of more than mere local significance — Article 8(4) of Regulation 2017/1001 — Sector proximity — Application of national law by EUIPO — Right to be heard — Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)

OJ C, C/2024/547, 8.1.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/547/oj (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/547/oj

European flag

Official Journal
of the European Union

EN

Series C


C/2024/547

8.1.2024

Judgment of the General Court of 8 November 2023 — SkinIdent v EUIPO — Beiersdorf (NIVEA SKIN-IDENTICAL Q10)

(Case T-665/22) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark NIVEA SKIN-IDENTICAL Q10 - National trade mark and international registration of earlier word mark SKINIDENT - Earlier company name Skinident - Relative grounds for refusal - Absence of a likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Use in trade of a sign of more than mere local significance - Article 8(4) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Sector proximity - Application of national law by EUIPO - Right to be heard - Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001)

(C/2024/547)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: SkinIdent AG (Freienbach, Switzerland) (represented by: U. Hildebrandt, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Stoyanova-Valchanova and E. Markakis, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Beiersdorf AG (Hamburg, Germany) (represented by: V. von Bomhard, J. Fuhrmann and A. Malkmes, lawyers)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 18 August 2022 (Case R 1499/2021-5).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1.

Dismisses the action;

2.

Orders SkinIdent AG to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Beiersdorf AG;

3.

Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs.


(1)   OJ C 472, 12.12.2022.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/547/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)


Top