EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62021TA0461
Case T-461/21: Judgment of the General Court of 12 October 2022 — MCO (IP) v EUIPO — C8 (C2) (European Union trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for European Union figurative mark C2 — Earlier national figurative mark C8 — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Interdependence of factors — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Obligation to state reasons)
Case T-461/21: Judgment of the General Court of 12 October 2022 — MCO (IP) v EUIPO — C8 (C2) (European Union trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for European Union figurative mark C2 — Earlier national figurative mark C8 — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Interdependence of factors — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Obligation to state reasons)
Case T-461/21: Judgment of the General Court of 12 October 2022 — MCO (IP) v EUIPO — C8 (C2) (European Union trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for European Union figurative mark C2 — Earlier national figurative mark C8 — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Interdependence of factors — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Obligation to state reasons)
OJ C 472, 12.12.2022, p. 37–38
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
12.12.2022 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 472/37 |
Judgment of the General Court of 12 October 2022 — MCO (IP) v EUIPO — C8 (C2)
(Case T-461/21) (1)
(European Union trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for European Union figurative mark C2 - Earlier national figurative mark C8 - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Interdependence of factors - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 - Obligation to state reasons)
(2022/C 472/42)
Language of the case: French
Parties
Applicant: MCO (IP) Holdings Ltd (Tortola, British Virgin Islands) (represented by: A. Roughton, Barrister)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Hamel and D. Hanf, acting as Agents)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: C8 (Issy-les-Moulineaux, France) (represented by: M. Georges-Picot and C. Cuny, lawyers)
Re:
By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 26 May 2021 (Case R 909/2020-2).
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
|
1. |
Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office of the European Union for Intellectual Property (EUIPO) of 26 May 2021 (Case R 909/2020-2) in so far as it relates to services for which only a low degree of similarity was found; |
|
2. |
Dismisses the remainder of the action; |
|
3. |
Orders MCO (IP) Holdings Ltd, EUIPO and C8 to bear their own costs. |