Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 14 December 2018

EU trade markDefinition and acquisition of the EU trade markAbsolute grounds for refusalMarks composed exclusively of signs or indications capable of designating the characteristics of a product or serviceAimNeed to preserve availability

(European Parliament and Council Regulation No 2017/1001, Art. 7(1)(c))

(see para. 13)

EU trade markDefinition and acquisition of the EU trade markAbsolute grounds for refusalMarks composed exclusively of signs or indications capable of designating the characteristics of a product or serviceMeaning

(European Parliament and Council Regulation No 2017/1001, Art. 7(1)(c))

(see paras 15-18)

EU trade markDefinition and acquisition of the EU trade markAbsolute grounds for refusalMarks composed exclusively of signs or indications capable of designating the characteristics of a product or serviceAssessment of the descriptive nature of a signCriteria

(European Parliament and Council Regulation No 2017/1001, Art. 7(1)(c))

(see paras 19, 31)

EU trade markDefinition and acquisition of the EU trade markAbsolute grounds for refusalMarks composed exclusively of signs or indications capable of designating the characteristics of a product or serviceWord mark Business and technology working as one

(European Parliament and Council Regulation No 2017/1001, Art. 7(1)(c))

(see paras 32, 38)

EU trade markDefinition and acquisition of the EU trade markAbsolute grounds for refusalMarks devoid of any distinctive characterMarks constituted of advertising slogansSlogan carrying an objective message

(European Parliament and Council Regulation No 2017/1001, Art. 7(1)(b))

(see para. 34)

EU trade markDefinition and acquisition of the EU trade markAbsolute grounds for refusalOverlap of the scope of the grounds set out in Articles 7(1)(b) and 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 2017/1001

(European Parliament and Council Regulation No 2017/1001, Art. 7(1)(b) and (c))

(see para. 40)

EU trade markDecisions of the OfficePrinciple of equal treatmentPrinciple of sound administrationEUIPO’s previous decision-making practicePrinciple of legalityNeed for a strict and complete examination in each particular case

(European Parliament and Council Regulation No 2017/1001)

(see paras 44, 46)

EU trade markDefinition and acquisition of the EU trade markAssessment of the registrability of a signEU rules only taken into accountEarlier registration of the mark in certain Member States or third countriesDecisions not binding EU bodies

(European Parliament and Council Regulation No 2017/1001)

(see para. 45)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 20 October 2017 (Case R 808/2017-1), concerning an application for registration of the word sign Business and technology working as one as an EU trade mark.

Operative part

The Court:

Dismisses the action;

Orders Inforsacom Logicalis GmbH to pay the costs.