Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 1 February 2023.Hacker-Pschorr Bräu GmbH v European Union Intellectual Property Office.EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU word mark HACKER SPACE – Earlier EU word mark HACKER-PSCHORR and earlier EU figurative mark Hacker Pschorr, as well as earlier national word marks HACKERBRÄU and HACKER – Relative ground for refusal – Identification of the ground on which the opposition is based – Article 8(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Article 2(2)(c) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625.Case T-349/22.

Judgment // 01/02/2023 // 2 min read
bookmark 6 citations

Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 1 February 2023 –Hacker-Pschorr Bräu v EUIPO – Vandělíková (HACKER SPACE)

(Case T‑349/22) ( 1 )

(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for EU word mark HACKER SPACE – Earlier EU word mark HACKER-PSCHORR and earlier EU figurative mark Hacker Pschorr, as well as earlier national word marks HACKERBRÄU and HACKER – Relative ground for refusal – Identification of the ground on which the opposition is based – Article 8 (1) (a) and (b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 – Article 2(2) (c) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625)

  1. EU trade mark – Appeals procedure – Appeal against a decision of the Opposition Division of EUIPO – Examination by the Board of Appeal – Scope – Facts and evidence not produced in support of the opposition within the period prescribed for that purpose – Account taken – Facts and evidence determining the grounds on which the opposition is based – Precluded

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 46(1); Commission Regulation 2018/625, Art. 2(2)(c) and (4))

(see paragraph 33)

  1. EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Determination of the grounds on which the notice of opposition is based

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 46(1))

(see paragraph 40)

  1. EU trade mark – Decisions of EUIPO – Principle of equal treatment –Principle of sound administration – EUIPO’s previous decision-making practice – Principle of legality

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001)

(see paragraphs 41, 49)

Operative part

The Court:

  1. Dismisses the action;

  2. Orders each party to bear its own costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 284, 25.7.2022.

Trade marks