Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 25 September 2018

EU trade markDefinition and acquisition of the EU trade markAbsolute grounds for refusalMarks devoid of any distinctive characterMeaningCriteria for assessment

(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(b))

(see paras 15-17, 39)

EU trade markDefinition and acquisition of the EU trade markAbsolute grounds for refusalMarks devoid of any distinctive characterMarks constituted of advertising slogansDistinctive characterApplication of specific criteria for assessmentNot permissible

(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(b))

(see paras 18, 19)

EU trade markDefinition and acquisition of the EU trade markAbsolute grounds for refusalMarks devoid of any distinctive characterMarks constituted of advertising slogansFlattering promotional formula

(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(b))

(see paras 20, 22)

EU trade markDefinition and acquisition of the EU trade markAbsolute grounds for refusalMarks devoid of any distinctive characterMarks constituted of advertising slogansSlogan with a fantasy character

(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(b))

(see para. 21)

EU trade markDefinition and acquisition of the EU trade markAbsolute grounds for refusalMarks devoid of any distinctive characterWord mark happy life

(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 7(1)(b))

(see paras 29, 31, 43, 46)

EU trade markDecisions of the OfficePrinciple of equal treatmentPrinciple of sound administrationEUIPO’s previous decision-making practicePrinciple of legality

(see para. 45)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 May 2017 (Case R 1965/2016-4) concerning an application for registration of the word sign happy life as an EU trade mark.

Operative part

The Court:

Dismisses the action;

Orders Medisana AG to pay the costs.