Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 11 October 2017. 47      Thus, the General Court cannot be criticised for having considered, in paragraph 38 of the judgment under appeal, that Cactus was not required to specify the goods or types of goods to which the retail trade related. The General Court was therefore wrong not to apply the interpretation adopted in that judgment to the earlier marks. If the application concerns only some of those goods or services, the applicant is required to specify which of the goods or services in that class are intended to be covered. It observed that, in that judgment, the Court confirmed the reasoning adopted by the General Court, according to which the registration of an earlier trade mark referring to a class heading was to be interpreted as seeking to protect that trade mark exclusively for all the goods in the alphabetical list of the relevant class and not beyond, in accordance with the provisions of Communication No 2/12 relating to trade marks registered before the delivery of the judgment in IP Translator. 29      The Court overturned that approach in the judgment in IP Translator. The General Court thereby concluded that, for the earlier marks, the designation of the class heading of Class 35 of the Nice Agreement covered all the services within that class, including the services consisting in the retail of any goods. 66      It should be recalled that, in so far as it does not impose strict conformity between the form in which the trade mark is used and the form in which the mark was registered, the purpose of point (a) of the second subparagraph of Article 15(1) of that regulation is to allow its proprietor, on the occasion of its commercial exploitation, to make variations in the sign, which, without altering its distinctive character, enable it to be better adapted to the marketing and promotion requirements of the goods or services concerned (see, to that effect, judgment of 18 July 2013, Specsavers International Healthcare and Others, C‑252/12, EU:C:2013:497, paragraph 29). 38      The Court indicated, in paragraphs 29 and 30 of the judgment of 16 February 2017, Brandconcern v EUIPO and Scooters India (C‑577/14 P, ‘the judgment in Brandconcern’, EU:C:2017:122), that the IP Translator judgment provided clarifications only on the requirements relating to new EU trade mark registration applications, and thus does not concern trade marks that were already registered at the date of that latter judgment’s delivery. 11      On 13 August 2009 Ms Isabel Del Rio Rodríguez filed an application to register the following figurative sign as an EU trade mark with EUIPO, under Regulation No 207/2009: 12      The goods and services in respect of which registration was sought are in Classes 31, 39 and 44 of the Nice Agreement. ASEAN TMclass is an online, multi-lingual, consultation tool offering free-of-charge access to a database of terms accepted by the participating ASEAN IP Offices as suitable to identify goods and services for the purposes of the registration of marks. Therefore, goods and services may not be regarded as being similar to each other on the ground that they appear in the same class under the Nice Classification, and goods and services may not be regarded as being dissimilar from each other on the ground that they appear in different classes under the Nice Classification.’. 58      Cactus argues, primarily, that the second ground of appeal must be regarded as inadmissible since EUIPO is, in fact, asking the Court to reassess factual elements and thus to substitute its own assessment for that of the General Court. The Court thus inferred, in paragraph 31 of the judgment in Brandconcern, that it therefore could not be considered that the Court, by the IP Translator judgment, had sought to question the validity of the approach set out in Communication No 4/03 as regards trade marks registered before the delivery of that latter judgment. 27      By its first ground of appeal, EUIPO criticises the General Court for having infringed Article 28 of Regulation No 207/2009, read in conjunction with Rule 2 of Regulation No 2868/95, in adopting an erroneous interpretation of the judgments of 19 June 2012, Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys (C‑307/10, ‘the judgment in IP Translator’, EU:C:2012:361), and of 7 July 2005, Praktiker Bau- und Heimwerkermärkte (C‑418/02, ‘the judgment in Praktiker Bau’, EU:C:2005:425). If the earlier [EU] trade mark has been used in relation to only part of the goods or services for which it is registered it shall, for the purposes of the examination of the opposition, be deemed to be registered in respect only of that part of the goods or services.’. The EUIPO proposes signing a maximum of three framework contracts in cascade per lot, with a maximum of three contractors per lot and a duration of 1 year, which may be extended up to three times, for a maximum of 4 years each. Every year, it registers an average of 135 000 EU trade marks and close to 100 000 designs. 8        The first paragraph of Point IV of Communication No 4/03 of the President of EUIPO, of 16 June 2003, concerning the use of class headings in lists of goods and services for Community trade mark applications and registrations (‘Communication No 4/03’), stated: ‘The 34 classes for goods and the 11 classes for services comprise the totality of all goods and services. You have made no selection. (Appeal — EU trade mark — Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Figurative mark containing the word elements ‘CACTUS OF PEACE CACTUS DE LA PAZ’ — Opposition by the proprietor of word and figurative EU trade marks containing the word element ‘Cactus’ — Nice Classification — Article 28 — Point (a) of the second subparagraph of Article 15(1) of Regulation No 207/2009 — Genuine use of the mark in an abbreviated form). The Office issues a revision of the Guidelines on a yearly basis. A surcharge of 50 EUR is also levied for the 2nd class, and 150 EUR for each subsequent class in excess of 2. Simple, cost-efficient and safe method to maintain your trademark and design portfolio. It consists of 45 classes. Choosing EUIPO The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) is a world-class organisation with global reach. Lao PDR, MM EU Agencies Network An agent is not necessary for applicants who have an office or residence in one of the member countries. Malaysia, PH party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO. 50      It follows from the foregoing considerations that the General Court did not err in law in holding that, for the earlier trade marks at issue, the designation of the class heading of Class 35 of the Nice Agreement covered all the services included in that class, including services consisting of the retail of goods. Paints, varnishes, lacquers; Preservatives against rust and against deterioration of wood; Colorants, dyes; Inks for printing, marking and engraving; Raw natural resins; Metals in foil and powder form for use in painting, decorating, printing and art. Hogere voorziening ingesteld door het EUIPO tegen het arrest van het GEU (IEPT20150715) waarin het beroep tegen de beslissing van de Kamer van Beroep van het EUIPO werd toegewezen voor zover was geoordeeld dat een aantal diensten uit klasse 35 (detailhandel van o.a. 49      Last, to the extent that Article 28(8) of Regulation No 207/2009, as amended by Regulation (EU) No 2015/2424 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2015 (OJ 2015 L 341, p. 21), lays down a transitional provision allowing the proprietors of EU trade marks applied for before 22 June 2012 and registered in respect of the entire heading of a class of the Nice Classification to declare, before 24 September 2016, that their intention, at the date when the application was lodged, was to apply for protection for goods and services other than those covered by the literal meaning of that heading but included in the alphabetical list for that class, it suffices to point out that that provision was not applicable at the date of the decision at issue. Chráňte svoje duševné vlastníctvo v Európskej únii. Press. In particular, it found that the Opposition Division had erred in considering that Cactus had adduced proof of genuine use of the earlier trade marks in respect of ‘retailing of natural plants and flowers, grains; fresh fruits and vegetables’ services in Class 35 of the Nice Agreement. For full functionality of this site you will need to activate cookies in your browser. Harmonised: No. EUIPO thus considers that the General Court erred in finding that the earlier marks were protected in respect of retail services. You can fill in the paper forms if you want to apply by post. Thailand, VN Philippines, SG The Nice Classification (NCL), established by the Nice Agreement (1957), is an international classification of goods and services applied for the registration of marks. The column uses data on applications to explore the detail, showing applications by Chinese firms, new firms, and firms in certain product sectors have risen. EUIPO is the European Union Intellectual Property Office responsible for managing the EU trade mark and the registered Community design. The EUIPO has published new guidelines today for the examination of applications for registered Community Designs claiming priority. 7        By two communications, one published in 2003, the other in 2012, the President of EUIPO issued guidance concerning the use of class headings of goods provided for in the Nice Agreement. 53      EUIPO argues that that finding is vitiated by four errors of law. Joined TMclass: 15/03/2014. 22      In support of its action, Cactus relied on, in essence, three pleas in law, alleging respectively (i) infringement of Article 42(2) of Regulation No 207/2009, (ii) infringement of Articles 75 and 76(1) of that regulation and (iii) infringement of Article 76(2) of that regulation. An EUTM is a pending or formal registration of a trademark recognized across the entire EU community rather than acknowledged country by country. 6        Rule 2 of Regulation No 2868/95, entitled ‘List of goods and services’, provides: ‘1. APPEAL under Article 56 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, brought on 22 September 2015. This means that once users reach the product indication stage of their efiling application, they can now browse and select terms from DesignClass Online filing of notice of opposition, request for renewals, change in representative etc. 24      By its appeal, EUIPO claims that the Court should: –        allow the appeal in its entirety and set aside the judgment under appeal, and. Een IE-professional kan u eventueel helpen een volledig kostenplaatje te maken. The General Court thus has exclusive jurisdiction to find and appraise the relevant facts and to assess the evidence. The Nice Agreement concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks is composed of 45 classes of goods and services. 40      As the Advocate General observed in points 45 and 46 of his Opinion, the scope of the protection afforded by trade marks that have been registered may not be altered on the basis of a non-binding communication which has no function other than to provide clarification for applicants as to the practices of EUIPO. 9        On 20 June 2012 the President of EUIPO adopted Communication No 2/12, repealing Communication No 4/03 and concerning the use of class headings in lists of goods and services for Community trade mark applications and registrations (‘Communication No 2/12’). 63      The second ground of appeal must therefore be rejected as inadmissible in so far as it concerns the definition of the relevant public and that public’s perception of the earlier figurative mark. Assist offices, for example, to carry out in-depth examinations or to help examiners to check earlier priority rights. 18      Registration of the trade mark applied for was therefore refused for the goods and services mentioned in paragraph 16 above, but accepted for the services in Class 39 of the Nice Agreement. The list of goods and services shall be worded in such a way as to indicate clearly the nature of the goods and services and to allow each item to be classified in only one class of the Nice Classification. European Union - Official website of the European Union. ASEAN TMclass helps you search for and verify the correct classification of those terms for goods or services in accordance with the criteria established by the International Classification (Nice Agreement). Een Uniemerk aanvragen kan al vanaf 850 euro voor één categorie (klasse). 20      By the decision at issue, the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO upheld the appeal and dismissed the opposition in its entirety. In legal administrative and legal processes, for example, help customs in their procedures, judges in case of conflict between parties. The usual UK fees of £170 will apply, including one class of goods or services, and an extra £50 for each additional class. Avenida de Europa 4, E-03008, Alicante, ES +34 - 965 13 91 00 +34 - 965 13 13 44 encourages convergence of practices among EU countries' IP offices through the European Trade Mark and Designs Network's cooperation activities EUIPO. 39      Communication No 2/12 cannot call into question that case-law and thus lead to the scope of protection of trade marks registered before the delivery of the IP Translator judgment for goods or services designated by the general indications of the class headings of the Nice Agreement being limited solely to the goods or services mentioned in the alphabetical list of that class and to that protection being denied, in accordance with Communication No 4/03, to all the goods and services within that class. New Assistance Service EUIPO informs about a new service for classification and formalities assistance. EUIPO takes the view that that line of authority applies retroactively and that it should have been applied to the earlier marks, regardless of the fact that those marks were registered before the delivery of those judgments. 64      The second ground of appeal, however, is admissible in so far as the first and second errors alleged in it concern the criteria in the light of which genuine use of a trade mark in an abbreviated form should be assessed. 30      Following the delivery of that judgment, Communication No 4/03 was repealed and replaced by Communication No 2/12 which limits, in relation to EU trade marks applied for before 21 June 2012, the scope of the general indications of a class heading of the Nice Agreement to all the goods or services in the alphabetical list of a particular class, as opposed to all the goods and services in that class. 71      The second ground of appeal must therefore be rejected as unfounded in so far as it concerns the criteria in the light of which it is appropriate to assess the equivalence of the signs at issue for the purpose of demonstrating genuine use. follow these instructions to turn cookies on,  31      In the present case, EUIPO does not dispute that retail services fall within Class 35 of the Nice Agreement. However, no legal advice will be covered by the new service. 48      Thus, it is apparent from examining the judgments in IP Translator — as interpreted by the Court in the Brandconcern judgment — and Praktiker Bau that the scope of the protection of a trade mark registered before the delivery of those judgments, such as Cactus’ word mark, registered on 18 October 2002, and Cactus’ figurative mark, registered on 6 April 2001, cannot be affected by the authority derived from those judgments in so far as they concern only new applications for registration as EU trade marks. the other party to the proceedings being: Cactus SA, established in Bertrange (Luxembourg), represented by K. Manhaeve, avocate. 14      The opposition was based on the following earlier marks: –        the EU word mark CACTUS, registered on 18 October 2002 under number 963694, for goods and services in Classes 2, 3, 5 to 9, 11, 16, 18, 20, 21, 23 to 35, 39, 41 and 42 of the Nice Agreement, and. Thus, none of those indications was regarded as too vague or indefinite. 32      EUIPO adds that, in finding that Class 35 of the Nice Agreement covers retail services for all possible goods, the General Court also made an error of interpretation in respect of the judgment in Praktiker Bau, which provides that the applicant is required to specify the goods or types of goods to which the retail services relate. It must therefore be held that the General Court could, without infringing point (a) of the second subparagraph of Article 15(1) of Regulation No 207/2009, merely carry out, in paragraph 61 of the judgment under appeal, an examination of the equivalence of the signs at issue on the visual and conceptual levels. The appraisal of those facts and the assessment of that evidence thus do not, save where they distort the facts or evidence, constitute a point of law which is subject as such to review by the Court of Justice on appeal (judgment of 12 July 2012, Smart Technologies v OHIM, C‑311/11 P, EU:C:2012:460, paragraph 52 and the case-law cited). Filing of new EU trademark from 250 EUR and more. About EUIPO. 23      By the judgment under appeal, the General Court upheld the first two pleas and rejected the third plea. Filing of new EU trademark from 250 EUR and more. European trademark applications are an indicator of business confidence. The Office’s current trade mark and design practice is reflected in a series of Guidelines that are intended to be of practical use both to Office staff in charge of the various procedures and to users of the Office’s services. That judgment did not concern the distinction between, on the one hand, the goods or services appearing in the alphabetical list of a class of the Nice Agreement and, on the other hand, overall and more broadly, goods or services covered by the heading of that class. 13      On 12 March 2010 Cactus filed a notice of opposition, pursuant to Article 41 of Regulation No 207/2009, to the registration of the mark applied for in respect of all the goods and services covered by it. 41      During the hearing before the Court, EUIPO contended that it could not be inferred from the Brandconcern judgment that the protection afforded by the earlier marks could extend beyond the goods or services mentioned in the alphabetical list of the class concerned. and refresh this page to continue using ASEAN TMClass. Missing the deadline for TM renewal can be remedied within 6 months following the term of expiry and by paying a surcharge. 57      Last, the General Court’s alleged fourth error was in its disregarding the need to examine the alteration of the distinctive character of the earlier composite mark in the perception of European consumers, not only consumers in Luxembourg. 70      As regards the second alleged error, it should be pointed out, as the Advocate General observed in point 81 of his Opinion, that the General Court rightly conducted a global assessment of the equivalence of the sign used in an abbreviated form, the stylised cactus alone, and of the sign protected by the earlier figurative mark, the stylised cactus, accompanied by the word element ‘Cactus’. Orders the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) to pay the costs. 72      Accordingly, the second ground of appeal must be rejected as partly inadmissible and partly unfounded. In the first case—R 721/2006–2—LOC had to be assessed in respect of medical services in class 42 between the marks depicted below. The Nice Classification assigns goods to Classes 1 to 34, and services to Classes 35 to 45. Indonesia, KH It was concerned solely with determining whether it was the literal meaning of the relevant class heading that was to be taken into account or, on the contrary, whether it was to be considered that such a heading covered the goods appearing in the alphabetical list of that class. You can  The EUIPO wishes to contract technical assistance services for the management of infrastructure and support services to the EUIPO. composed of T. von Danwitz, President of the Chamber, C. Vajda, E. Juhász, K. Jürimäe (Rapporteur) and C. Lycourgos, Judges. The Alphabetical List should therefore be consulted in order to ascertain the exact classification of each individual product or service. Since Cactus has applied for costs and EUIPO has been unsuccessful, the latter must be ordered to pay the costs. 59      In the alternative, Cactus contends that EUIPO’s arguments are unfounded. 56      The third alleged error lies in the General Court’s implicit basing of its finding of the equivalence between the stylised cactus and the form in which the composite mark was registered on the prior knowledge that consumers may have of the latter. Voor meer informatie kunt u contact opnemen met het Informatiecentrum van EUIPO in Spanje (+34 965 139 100). It also translates a list of Goods and Services and verifies if those terms appear in the classification databases of the Participating Offices; Brunei Darussalam, Indonesia, Cambodia, Lao PDR, Myanmar, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam. We also work with the IP offices of the EU Member States and international partners to offer a similar registration experience for trade marks and designs across Europe and the world. 54      The General Court committed a first error of law in considering that the stylised logo of a cactus was ‘essentially equivalent’ to the form in which the composite mark was registered. 34      Cactus disputes the merits of all those arguments. Simple, cost-efficient and safe method to maintain your trademark and design portfolio. Protect your intellectual property in the European Union. 46      Such an approach is moreover consistent, as the Advocate General noted in point 57 of his Opinion, with the principles of legal certainty and protection of legitimate expectations. Myanmar, MY European Union Intellectual Property Office. Protect your intellectual property in the European Union. Op de website van EUIPO vindt u de actuele tarieven. SKU: N/A Category: EU TRADEMARKS. 3        Article 15(1) of Regulation No 207/2009, entitled ‘Use of [EU] trade marks’, provides: ‘If, within a period of five years following registration, the proprietor has not put the [EU] trade mark to genuine use in the [Union] in connection with the goods or services in respect of which it is registered, or if such use has been suspended during an uninterrupted period of five years, the [EU] trade mark shall be subject to the sanctions provided for in this Regulation, unless there are proper reasons for non-use. On those grounds, the Court (Fourth Chamber) hereby: 2. Information on your rights to live, work, travel and study in another EU … ASEAN TMclass is an online, multi-lingual, consultation tool offering free-of-charge access to a database of terms accepted by the participating ASEAN IP Offices as suitable to identify goods and services for the purposes of the registration of marks. having regard to the written procedure and further to the hearing on 29 March 2017. after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 17 May 2017. As a consequence of this the use of all the general indications listed in the class heading of a particular class constitutes a claim to all the goods or services falling within this particular class.’. Vietnam. Nice class description 2. ... (EUIPO) in Alicante. ASEAN TMclass has been developed by the Intellectual Property Offices of the ASEAN Member States with the support of the EU-ASEAN Project on the Protection of Intellectual Property Rights (ECAP III Phase II) administered by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO). Beskyt dine varemærker og design i Den Europæiske Union. 62      As regards the fourth alleged error, by which EUIPO criticises the General Court for having examined the possible alteration of the distinctiveness of the earlier figurative mark only in the perception of consumers in Luxembourg and not in the perception of European consumers in general, it is appropriate, for the same reasoning as that set out in the preceding paragraph of the present judgment, to point out that the considerations criticised are factual in nature and that it is not for the Court of Justice to rule on them unless there has been a distortion of the facts, which is not alleged in the present case.
Intel Indonesia Facebook, Western Washington Medical Group Physicians, Ruff Ryders Ceo Waah Dean Net Worth, Tyranid Custom Hive Fleets, Master's In International Health University Of The Philippines, Neil Thompson Actor, иван ургант жена дети, Pubg War Mode Time, Kevin Durant All-time Points, Integrated Oil And Gas Meaning, James Cracknell Charity, Kcrw Eclectic 24 Playlist,