Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 9 December 2020

1. EU trade markAppeals procedureAction before the EU judicaturePower of the General Court to alter the contested decision

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

(see para. 22)

2. EU trade markSurrender, revocation and invalidityApplication for a declaration of invalidityDetermination of the grounds on which the application for a declaration of invalidity is based

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 95(1))

(see para. 27)

3. EU trade markSurrender, revocation and invalidityAbsolute grounds for invalidityMarks devoid of distinctive characterAssessment of distinctive characterCriteria

(Council Regulation No 40/94, Arts 7(1)(b) and 51(1)(a))

(see paras 40, 41)

4. EU trade markSurrender, revocation and invalidityAbsolute grounds for invalidityOverlap of the scope of the grounds set out in Article 7(1)(b) and Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 40/94

(Council Regulation No 40/94, Arts 7(1)(b) and (c), and 51(1)(a))

(see paras 42, 43)

5. EU trade markSurrender, revocation and invalidityAbsolute grounds for invalidityMarks devoid of distinctive characterAssessment of distinctive characterCriteriaPerception of the trade mark by the relevant publicAttention level of the public

(Council Regulation No 40/94, Arts 7(1)(b) and 51(1)(a))

(see para. 44)

6. EU trade markSurrender, revocation and invalidityAbsolute grounds for invalidityMarks devoid of distinctive characterTrade mark made up of several elementsPossible for the competent authority to examine each of the elements making up the trade markNeed to take account of the overall perception of the combination by the relevant public

(Council Regulation No 40/94, Arts 7(1)(b) and 51(1)(a))

(see para. 46)

7. EU trade markSurrender, revocation and invalidityAbsolute grounds for invalidityMarks devoid of distinctive characterWord mark Promed

(Council Regulation No 40/94, Arts 7(1)(b) and 51(1)(a))

(see paras 49, 51-55, 58)

8. 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 2017/1001)

(see paras 56, 57)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 November 2019 (Case R 614/2019-5), relating to invalidity proceedings between Centrumelektroniki and Promed kosmetische Erzeugnisse.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Promed GmbH kosmetische Erzeugnisse to pay the costs.