Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62018TJ0446

    Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 13 May 2020.
    Peek & Cloppenburg KG, Düsseldorf v European Union Intellectual Property Office.
    EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU word mark Peek & Cloppenburg — Earlier national commercial designation Peek & Cloppenburg — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Coexistence of the national commercial designation and the mark applied for — Demarcation agreement — Application of national law by EUIPO — Suspension of the administrative proceedings — Article 70 of Regulation 2017/1001 — Rule 20(7)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 (now Article 71(1) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625) — Manifest error of assessment.
    Case T-446/18.

    ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2020:187

     Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 13 May 2020 –
    Peek & Cloppenburg v EUIPO — Peek & Cloppenburg (Peek & Cloppenburg)

    (Case T‑446/18)

    (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU word mark Peek & Cloppenburg — Earlier national commercial designation Peek & Cloppenburg — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 — Coexistence of the national commercial designation and the mark applied for — Demarcation agreement — Application of national law by EUIPO — Suspension of the administrative proceedings — Article 70 of Regulation 2017/1001 — Rule 20(7)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 (now Article 71(1) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625) — Manifest error of assessment)

    1. 

    Judicial proceedings — Application initiating proceedings — Formal requirements — Brief summary of the pleas in law on which the application is based — Pleas in law not set out in the application — General reference to other documents — Inadmissibility

    (Statute of the Court of Justice, Arts 21, first para. and 53, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 177(1)(d))

    (see paras 29, 30)

    2. 

    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

    (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 72)

    (see para. 39)

    3. 

    EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark — Relative grounds for refusal — Opposition by the proprietor of an unregistered trade mark or other sign used in the course of trade — Conditions — Interpretation in the light of EU law — Assessment by reference to the criteria determined by the national law governing the sign relied on

    (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(4))

    (see paras 53-55)

    4. 

    EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark — Relative grounds for refusal — Opposition by the proprietor of an unregistered trade mark or other sign used in the course of trade — Review by the competent bodies of EUIPO and by the Court as to the national law applicable — Scope

    (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Arts 8(4) and 72(1) and (2))

    (see paras 68, 78-82)

    5. 

    EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark — Relative grounds for refusal — Opposition by the proprietor of an unregistered trade mark or other sign used in the course of trade — Sign giving its holder the right to prohibit the use of a more recent trade mark — Burden of proof

    (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(4)(b); Commission Regulation No 2868/95, Art. 1, rule 37)

    (see paras 70, 77, 83, 85)

    6. 

    EU trade mark — Procedural provisions — Examination of the facts of the EUIPO’s own motion — Opposition proceedings — Examination restricted to the facts, evidence and arguments provided — Assessment by the Office of the correctness of the facts pleaded and the probative value of evidence submitted — Scope

    (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 95)

    (see para. 84)

    7. 

    EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark — Relative grounds for refusal — Opposition by the proprietor of an unregistered trade mark or other sign used in the course of trade — Word mark and commercial designation Peek & Cloppenburg

    (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(4))

    (see paras 87-94, 97, 101, 104)

    8. 

    EU trade mark — Appeals procedure — Appeals before the Boards of Appeal — Stay of proceedings — Conditions

    (Commission Regulation No 2868/95, Art. 1, rules 20(7)(c) and 50(1))

    (see paras 114-116)

    9. 

    EU trade mark — Appeals procedure — Appeals before the Boards of Appeal — Stay of proceedings — Discretion of the Board of Appeal — Prima facie examination of the chances of success of a counterclaim for the declaration of a right — Scope

    (Commission Regulation No 2868/95, Art. 1, rules 20(7)(c) and 50(1))

    (see paras 118, 120-123, 125)

    Re:

    Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 April 2018 (Case R 1589/2007-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Peek & Cloppenburg (Hamburg) and Peek & Cloppenburg (Düsseldorf)).

    Operative part

    The Court:

    1. 

    Dismisses the action;

    2. 

    Orders Peek & Cloppenburg KG (Düsseldorf) to pay the costs.

    Top