This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62021TJ0537
Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 5 October 2022.
bett1.de GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office.
EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU word mark BODY STAR – Earlier EU word mark Bodyguard – Earlier national word mark Bodyguard – Relative ground for refusal – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001.
Case T-537/21.
Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 5 October 2022.
bett1.de GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office.
EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU word mark BODY STAR – Earlier EU word mark Bodyguard – Earlier national word mark Bodyguard – Relative ground for refusal – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001.
Case T-537/21.
ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2022:596
Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 5 October 2022 –
bett1.de v EUIPO – XXXLutz Marken (BODY STAR)
(Case T‑537/21) ( 1 )
(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU word mark BODY STAR – Earlier EU word mark Bodyguard – Earlier national word mark Bodyguard – Relative ground for refusal – 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 paragraphs 15, 16, 43, 44) |
|
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 paragraphs 18, 19) |
|
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 – Word marks BODY STAR and Bodyguard (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paragraphs 24-26, 30-32, 41, 42, 45, 50-53) |
|
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 between the goods or services in question – Criteria for assessment – Complementary nature of the goods or services (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paragraphs 27, 33) |
Operative part
The Court:
|
1. |
Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 23 June 2021 (Joined Cases R 1711/2020-2 et R 1727/2020-2) as regards ‘mattresses; mattress toppers; beds; bed frames; slatted bases for beds; bedding except linen; cushions; pillows; neck-supporting pillows; waterbeds, not for medical purposes; air mattresses’ in Class 20 and ‘bed blankets; bed linen and blankets; ticks [mattress covers]; mattress covers; ticks (mattress and pillow coverings); sleeping bags’ in Class 24; |
|
2. |
Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
|
3. |
Orders each party to bear its own costs. |