Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62020TJ0068

    Judgment of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) of 10 March 2021.
    Hauz 1929 Ltd v European Union Intellectual Property Office.
    EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the EU figurative mark HAUZ EST 1929 – Earlier EU word mark HOUZZ – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001.
    Case T-68/20.

    ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2021:127

     Judgment of the General Court (Tenth Chamber) of 10 March 2021 –
    Hauz 1929 v EUIPO – Houzz (HAUZ EST 1929)

    (Case T‑68/20)

    (EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the EU figurative mark HAUZ EST 1929 – Earlier EU word mark HOUZZ – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

    1. 

    EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Criteria for assessment

    (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))

    (see paras 16, 17, 58)

    2. 

    EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Assessment of the likelihood of confusion – Determination of the relevant public – Attention level of the public

    (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))

    (see para. 18)

    3. 

    EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Figurative marks HAUZ EST 1929 and HOUZZ

    (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))

    (see paras 24, 25, 37, 42, 47, 68-72)

    4. 

    EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Similarity of the marks concerned – Criteria for assessment

    (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))

    (see paras 26, 27)

    5. 

    EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Similarity of the marks concerned – Criteria for assessment – Composite mark

    (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))

    (see paras 28, 34, 40)

    6. 

    EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Criteria for assessment – Distinctiveness or reputation of the earlier mark – Effect

    (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))

    (see paras 48, 49, 59)

    7. 

    EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Weighing elements of similarity or difference between the signs – Taking into account of the intrinsic characteristics of the signs or the conditions in which the goods or services are marketed

    (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))

    (see paras 60, 61)

    Re:

    Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 November 2019 (Case R 885/2019-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Houzz and Hauz 1929.

    Operative part

    The Court:

    1. 

    Dismisses the action;

    2. 

    Orders Hauz 1929 Ltd to pay the costs.

    Top