Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62017TJ0758

    Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 8 November 2018.
    Perfect Bar LLC v European Union Intellectual Property Office.
    EU trade mark — Application for EU word mark PERFECT BAR — Absolute grounds for refusal — Descriptive character — No distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001).
    Case T-758/17.

    Court reports – general

    Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 8 November 2018 –
    Perfect Bar v EUIPO (PERFECT BAR)

    (Case T‑758/17)

    (EU trade mark — Application for EU word mark PERFECT BAR — Absolute grounds for refusal — Descriptive character — No distinctive character — Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

    1. 

    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. 16)

    2. 

    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 — Meaning

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

    (see paras 17-19)

    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 — Word mark PERFECT BAR

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

    (see paras 30, 51-53, 64, 76)

    4. 

    EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark — Absolute grounds for refusal — Examination of the grounds for refusal having regard to each of the products 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) and 75, first sentence)

    (see paras 34-36)

    5. 

    EU trade mark — Decisions of the Office — Legality — Examination by the EU judicature — Criteria

    (Council Regulation No 207/2009)

    (see para. 56)

    6. 

    EU trade mark — Decisions of the Office — Principle of equal treatment — Principle of sound administration — EUIPO’s previous decision-making practice — Principle of legality — Need for a strict and complete examination in each particular case

    (Council Regulation No 207/2009)

    (see paras 57, 58)

    7. 

    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 paras 61-63)

    8. 

    EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark — Absolute grounds for refusal — Separate examination of the various grounds for refusal — Overlap of the scope of the grounds set out in Articles 7(1)(b) and 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009

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

    (see para. 69)

    Re:

    Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 September 2017 (Case R 2439/2016-4), relating to an application for registration of the word sign PERFECT BAR as an EU trade mark.

    Operative part

    The Court:

    1. 

    Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 5 September 2017 (Case R 2439/2016-4) in respect of ‘Protein supplements’ and ‘Dietary and nutritional supplements’;

    2. 

    Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

    3. 

    Orders each party to bear its own costs.

    Top