This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62022TJ0349
Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 1 February 2023.
Hacker-Pschorr Bräu GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office.
EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU word mark HACKER SPACE – Earlier EU word mark HACKER-PSCHORR and earlier EU figurative mark Hacker Pschorr, as well as earlier national word marks HACKERBRÄU and HACKER – Relative ground for refusal – Identification of the ground on which the opposition is based – Article 8(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Article 2(2)(c) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625.
Case T-349/22.
Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 1 February 2023.
Hacker-Pschorr Bräu GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office.
EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU word mark HACKER SPACE – Earlier EU word mark HACKER-PSCHORR and earlier EU figurative mark Hacker Pschorr, as well as earlier national word marks HACKERBRÄU and HACKER – Relative ground for refusal – Identification of the ground on which the opposition is based – Article 8(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Article 2(2)(c) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625.
Case T-349/22.
Court reports – general
ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2023:31
Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 1 February 2023 –
Hacker-Pschorr Bräu v EUIPO – Vandělíková (HACKER SPACE)
(Case T‑349/22) ( 1 )
(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU word mark HACKER SPACE – Earlier EU word mark HACKER-PSCHORR and earlier EU figurative mark Hacker Pschorr, as well as earlier national word marks HACKERBRÄU and HACKER – Relative ground for refusal – Identification of the ground on which the opposition is based – Article 8(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Article 2(2)(c) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625)
|
1. |
EU trade mark – Appeals procedure – Appeal against a decision of the Opposition Division of EUIPO – Examination by the Board of Appeal – Scope – Facts and evidence not produced in support of the opposition within the period prescribed for that purpose – Account taken – Facts and evidence determining the grounds on which the opposition is based – Precluded (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 46(1); Commission Regulation 2018/625, Art. 2(2)(c) and (4)) (see paragraph 33) |
|
2. |
EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Determination of the grounds on which the notice of opposition is based (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 46(1)) (see paragraph 40) |
|
3. |
EU trade mark – Decisions of EUIPO – Principle of equal treatment –Principle of sound administration – EUIPO’s previous decision-making practice – Principle of legality (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001) (see paragraphs 41, 49) |
Operative part
The Court:
|
1. |
Dismisses the action; |
|
2. |
Orders each party to bear its own costs. |
( 1 ) OJ C 284, 25.7.2022.