This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62022TJ0662
Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 12 July 2023.
Zalina Tavitova v European Union Intellectual Property Office.
EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU figurative mark AURUS – International registration of the earlier word mark AUDAS – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001.
Case T-662/22.
Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 12 July 2023.
Zalina Tavitova v European Union Intellectual Property Office.
EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU figurative mark AURUS – International registration of the earlier word mark AUDAS – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001.
Case T-662/22.
ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2023:393
Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 12 July 2023 –
Tavitova v EUIPO – Cordier (AURUS)
(Case T‑662/22) ( 1 )
(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU figurative mark AURUS – International registration of the earlier word mark AUDAS – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)
1. |
EU trade mark – Appeals procedure – Action before the EU judicature – Jurisdiction of the General Court – Alteration of a decision of the Office – Assessment in the light of the powers conferred on the Board of Appeal (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 72(3)) (see paragraph 16) |
2. |
EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of 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 22, 23, 101, 102) |
3. |
EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Refusal to register where there is a relative ground for refusal, even if limited to part of the Union (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paragraph 24) |
4. |
EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Similarity between the goods or services in question – Criteria for assessment – Complementary nature of the goods (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paragraphs 35, 46, 57) |
5. |
EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Figurative mark AURUS and word mark AUDUS (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paragraphs 53, 69, 80, 81, 89, 94, 103, 104) |
6. |
EU trade mark – Decisions of the Office – Legality – Examination by the EU judicature – Criteria (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 2017/1001) (see paragraph 66) |
7. |
EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of 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 paragraphs 71, 78, 85) |
Operative part
The Court:
1. |
Dismisses the action; |
2. |
Orders Ms Zalina Tavitova to pay the costs incurred by Cordier. |
( 1 ) OJ C 7, 9.1.2023.