EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

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.

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.

Top