Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62016TJ0326

    Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 8 June 2017.
    Bundesverband Deutsche Tafel eV v European Union Intellectual Property Office.
    EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark Tafel — Enforcement by EUIPO of a judgment setting aside a decision of one of its Boards of Appeal — Absolute ground for refusal — Article 52(1)(a) and Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Descriptive character — Article 65(6) of Regulation No 207/2009 — Decision taken following the annulment by the General Court of an earlier decision.
    Case T-326/16.

    Court reports – general – 'Information on unpublished decisions' section

    Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 8 June 2017 —
    Bundesverband Deutsche Tafel v EUIPO — Tiertafel Deutschland (Tafel)

    (Case T‑326/16)

    (EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU word mark Tafel — Enforcement by EUIPO of a judgment setting aside a decision of one of its Boards of Appeal — Absolute ground for refusal — Article 52(1)(a) and Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Descriptive character — Article 65(6) of Regulation No 207/2009 — Decision taken following the annulment by the General Court of an earlier decision)

    1. 

    Actions for annulment — Judgment annulling a measure — Effects — Obligation to implement — Scope — Both the operative part and the grounds of the judgment to be taken into account — Retroactive effect of annulment

    (Art. 266 TFEU)

    (see paras 18, 19)

    2. 

    EU trade mark — Appeals procedure — Action before the EU judicature — Implementation of a judgment annulling a decision adopted by a Board of Appeal — New examination of the appeal

    (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 65(6))

    (see paras 20-22)

    3. 

    EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark — Absolute grounds for refusal — Marks composed exclusively of signs or indications capable of designating the characteristics of a product or service — Aim — Need to preserve availability

    (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(c))

    (see para. 32)

    4. 

    EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark — Absolute grounds for refusal — Marks composed exclusively of signs or indications capable of designating the characteristics of a product or service — Criteria

    (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(c))

    (see paras 33-37)

    5. 

    EU trade mark — Surrender, revocation and invalidity — Absolute grounds for invalidity — Registration contrary to Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009 — Word mark Tafel

    (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(c))

    (see paras 39-44)

    6. 

    EU trade mark — Appeals procedure — Action before the EU judicature — Jurisdiction of the General Court — Review of the lawfulness of decisions of the Boards of Appeal — Re-examination of the facts in the light of evidence not previously submitted before EUIPO bodies — Precluded

    (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 65)

    (see para. 46)

    7. 

    EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark — Absolute grounds for refusal — Marks devoid of any distinctive character — Exception — Acquisition through use — Examination by the Office — Limitation to the facts and evidence raised by the trade mark applicant

    (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(3))

    (see para. 49)

    8. 

    EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark — Assessment of the registrability of a sign — EU rules only taken into account — Earlier registration of the mark in certain Member States or third countries — Decisions not binding EU bodies

    (Council Regulation No 207/2009)

    (see para. 51)

    Re:

    ACTION brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 4 April 2016 (Case R 248/2016-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between Tiertafel Deutschland and Bundesverband Deutsche Tafel.

    Operative part

    The Court:

    1. 

    Dismisses the action;

    2. 

    Orders Bundesverband Deutsche Tafel eV to pay the costs.

    Top