This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62017TA0800
Case T-800/17: Judgment of the General Court of 24 January 2019 — Brown Street Holdings v EUIPO — Enesan (FIGHT LIFE) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Word mark FIGHT LIFE — Earlier EU word mark FIGHT FOR LIFE — 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) — Obligation to state reasons — Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94 of Regulation 2017/1001))
Case T-800/17: Judgment of the General Court of 24 January 2019 — Brown Street Holdings v EUIPO — Enesan (FIGHT LIFE) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Word mark FIGHT LIFE — Earlier EU word mark FIGHT FOR LIFE — 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) — Obligation to state reasons — Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94 of Regulation 2017/1001))
Case T-800/17: Judgment of the General Court of 24 January 2019 — Brown Street Holdings v EUIPO — Enesan (FIGHT LIFE) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Word mark FIGHT LIFE — Earlier EU word mark FIGHT FOR LIFE — 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) — Obligation to state reasons — Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94 of Regulation 2017/1001))
OJ C 103, 18.3.2019, p. 37–38
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
18.3.2019 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 103/37 |
Judgment of the General Court of 24 January 2019 — Brown Street Holdings v EUIPO — Enesan (FIGHT LIFE)
(Case T-800/17) (1)
((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - International registration designating the European Union - Word mark FIGHT LIFE - Earlier EU word mark FIGHT FOR LIFE - 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) - Obligation to state reasons - Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 94 of Regulation 2017/1001)))
(2019/C 103/48)
Language of the case: German
Parties
Applicant: Brown Street Holdings Ltd (Auckland, New Zealand) (represented by: initially C. Hufnagel, M. Kleespies, J. Clayton-Chen and A. Bender, and subsequently M. Kleespies and A. Bender, lawyers)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Walicka and M. Fischer, acting as Agents)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Enesan AG (Zurich, Switzerland)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 September 2017 (Case R 36/2017-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Brown Street Holdings and Enesan.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
|
1. |
Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 26 September 2017 (Case R 36/2017-2) in so far as it rejected the opposition against the application for registration of the mark applied for in respect of the goods in Class 5 of the Nice Agreement concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks of 15 June 1957, as revised and amended; |
|
2. |
Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Brown Street Holdings Ltd. |