1. 

Appeal — Grounds — Incorrect assessment of the facts and evidence — Inadmissibility — Review by the Court of the assessment of the facts and evidence — Possible only where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted

(Art. 256 TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.)

(see para. 47)

2. 

Appeal — Grounds — Incorrect assessment of the facts and evidence — Inadmissibility — Review by the Court of the assessment of the facts and evidence — Possible only where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted — Requirement that the distortion be obvious from the documents in the file

(Art. 256 TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.)

(see para. 48)

3. 

EU trade mark — Surrender, revocation and invalidity — Absolute grounds for invalidity — Applicant in bad faith when lodging the trade mark application — Criteria for assessment — No need to prove the existence of the likelihood of confusion between the marks at issue

(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 52(1)(b))

(see para. 61, 62)

4. 

EU trade mark — Surrender, revocation and invalidity — Absolute grounds for invalidity — Applicant in bad faith when lodging the trade mark application — Criteria for assessment — Taking into account of all relevant factors at the time of filing the application for registration — Intention of the applicant

(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 52(1)(b))

(see para. 63)

1. 

Dismisses the appeal;

2. 

Orders Outsource Professional Services Ltd to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Flatworld Solutions Pvt Ltd in relation to the appeal proceedings;

3. 

Orders the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) to bear its own costs in relation to the appeal proceedings.