Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 20 January 2021 –
Jareš Procházková et Jareš v EUIPO – Elton Hodinářská (MANUFACTURE PRIM 1949)

(Case T‑656/18)

(EU trade mark – Invalidity proceedings – EU figurative mark MANUFACTURE PRIM 1949 – Absence of a prior right acquired pursuant to national law – Article 52(2)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 40/04 (now Article 60(2)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

EU trade mark – Appeals procedure – Action before the EU judicature – Jurisdiction of the General Court – Review of the lawfulness of decisions of the Boards of Appeal – Account taken by the General Court of matters of law and fact not previously raised before the departments of EUIPO – Not included

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 72)

(see para. 16)

2.	Action for annulment – Subject matter – Decision based on several pillars of reasoning, each sufficient to justify the operative part – Annulment of such a decision – Conditions (Art. 263 TFEU) (see para. 19)

EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Relative grounds for invalidity – Use of the mark capable of being prohibited by virtue of another earlier right – Review by the competent bodies of OHIM and by the Court as to the national law applicable – Scope

(Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 52(2); Commission Regulation No 2868/95, Art. 1, Rule 37)

(see paras 24-27)

4.	EU trade mark – Procedural provisions – Examination of the facts of EUIPO’s own motion – Duty of diligence (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 74(1)) (see para. 63)

EU trade mark – Procedural provisions – Examination of the facts of EUIPO’s own motion – Invalidity proceedings concerning relative grounds for refusal – OHIM examining evidence superficially or not taking certain elements into account – No infringement of Article 74 of Regulation No 40/94

(Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 74(1))

(see para. 67)

EU trade mark – Procedural provisions – Statement of reasons for decisions – First sentence of Article 73 of Regulation No 40/94 – Scope identical to that of Article 296 TFEU – Recourse by the Board of Appeal to implicit reasoning – Whether permissible – Conditions

(Art. 296 TFEU; Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 73)

(see paras 68-71)

7.	EU trade mark – Surrender, revocation and invalidity – Relative grounds for invalidity – Use of the mark capable of being prohibited by virtue of another earlier right – Copyright – Figurative mark MANUFACTURE PRIM 1949 (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 52(2)(c)) (see paras 75-81, 85)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 September 2018 (Case R 1159/2017-4), relating to invalidity proceedings between, on the one hand, Mrs Jareš Procházková and Mr Jareš and, on the other hand, Elton Hodinářská.

Operative part

The Court:

1.	Dismisses the action;

2.	Orders Mrs Hana Jareš Procházková and Mr Antonín Jareš to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO);

3.	Orders Elton Hodinářská a.s. to bear its own costs.