EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62020TJ0153

Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 10 February 2021.
Gabriele Bachmann v European Union Intellectual Property Office.
EU trade mark – Application for EU word mark LIGHTYOGA – Absolute ground for refusal – Descriptive character – Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001.
Case T-153/20.

ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2021:70

 Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 10 February 2021 –
Bachmann v EUIPO (LIGHTYOGA)

(Case T‑153/20)

(EU trade mark – Application for EU word mark LIGHTYOGA – Absolute ground for refusal – Descriptive character – Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

1. 

EU trade mark – Procedural provisions – Statement of reasons for decisions – First sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation No 2017/1001 – Scope identical to that of Article 296 TFEU

(Art. 296 TFEU; Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council 2017/1001, Art. 94(1), First sentence)

(see para. 26)

2. 

EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Separate examination of the grounds for refusal in relation to each of the goods or services covered by the application for registration – Obligation to state the reasons for refusing to register – Scope

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Arts 8(1) and 94(1))

(see paras 27-29, 71)

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 – Concept

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 7(1)(c))

(see paras 41-44)

4. 

EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Application for registration of a sign for all the goods or services falling within the same category – Assessment of the descriptiveness of the sign concerning all the goods or services

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 7(1)(c))

(see para. 45)

5. 

EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Absolute grounds for refusal – Marks composed exclusively of signs or indications which may serve to designate the characteristics of goods – Word mark LIGHTYOGA

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 7(1)(c))

(see paras 48, 58, 60, 68, 70, 72)

6. 

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

(European Parliament and Council Regulation No 2017/1001)

(see para. 73)

7. 

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

(see para. 74-76)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 December 2019 (Case R 2346/2019 2), concerning an application for registration of the word sign LIGHTYOGA as an EU trade mark.

Operative part

The Court:

1. 

Dismisses the action;

2. 

Orders Gabriele Bachmann to pay the costs.

Top