I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
(Case T-141/22) (*)
(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark SFR SPORT 1 - Earlier national and international figurative marks sport1 - Relative ground for refusal - No likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Distinctive character acquired through use - Interdependence between factors)
(2023/C 112/43)
Language of the case: English
Applicant: Sport1 GmbH (Ismaning, Germany) (represented by: J. Krekel and C. Otto, lawyers)
Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Markakis, acting as Agent)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Société française du radiotéléphone — SFR (Paris, France) (represented by: M. Pasquier, lawyer)
By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 10 December 2021 (Case R 2329/2020-1).
The Court:
1.Partially annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 10 December 2021 (Case R 2329/2020-1), in so far as the Board of Appeal found that there was no likelihood of confusion with regard to the services covered by the mark applied for which are referred to in paragraphs 42 to 44 and 52 to 61 of that decision;
2.Dismisses the action as to the remainder;
3.Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Sport1 GmbH;
4.Orders Société française du radiotéléphone — SFR to bear its own costs.
(*)
Language of the case: English.
ECLI:EU:C:2025:140
OJ C 191, 10.5.2022.