Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 23 October 2024

1. EU trade markSurrender, revocation and invalidityAbsolute grounds for invalidityApplicant in bad faith when filing the trade mark applicationConcept of bad faithScope

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 59(1)(b))

(see paragraphs 23-25)

2. EU trade markSurrender, revocation and invalidityAbsolute grounds for invalidityApplicant in bad faith when filing the trade mark applicationCriteria for assessmentTaking into account all relevant factors at the time of filing of the application for registrationApplicant’s knowledge that a third party is using an identical or similar signIntention of the applicantOrigin and use of the contested signCommercial logic underlying the registration of the contested sign as an EU trade markChronology of events leading up to the filing of the trade mark application

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 59(1)(b))

(see paragraphs 26-27, 44)

3. EU trade markSurrender, revocation and invalidityAbsolute grounds for invalidityApplicant in bad faith when filing the trade mark applicationBurden of proof

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 59(1)(b))

(see paragraphs 28, 29)

4. EU trade markSurrender, revocation and invalidityAbsolute grounds for invalidityApplicant in bad faith when filing the trade mark applicationWord mark E-Plus

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 59(1)(b))

(see paragraphs 45, 46, 53, 54, 58)

5. EU trade markProcedural provisionsStatement of reasons for decisionsFirst sentence of Article 94(1) of Regulation 2017/1001Scope identical to that of Article 296 TFEUEssential procedural requirement

(Art. 296 TFEU; European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 94(1), first sentence)

(see paragraphs 62, 66)

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders ePlus Inc. to pay the costs.