Now in its twelfth year, Class 46 is dedicated to European trade mark law and practice. This weblog is written by a team of enthusiasts who want to spread the word and share their thoughts with others.
Who we all are...
THURSDAY, 26 JULY 2012
Natural Beauty rejected by General Court
In Case T-559/10, the applicant Laboratoire Garnier et Cie filed an application for registration of a figurative CTM for Class 3 goods ‘‘Cosmetics; body and beauty care products’ which was rejected by the OHIM examiner.
The First Board of Appeal dismissed the appeal and the decision was upheld by the General Court. Firstly, the mark applied for consists of two words which have a clear meaning in English and the expression ‘natural beauty’ could serve to describe the fact that the goods in issue help the consumer to preserve his or her natural beauty, with the result that that expression conveyed obvious and direct information on the quality of the goods.
Furthermore, the stylisation of the sign applied for is minimal and could not alter the conclusion that that sign is descriptive and there is a sufficiently direct and specific relationship between the mark applied for and the goods at issue for the ground for refusal set out in Article 7(1)(c) of CTMR.
As regards the message conveyed by the sign applied for, it is so obvious and the stylisation of the descriptive terms making up that sign is negligible so the sign would not be perceived by the relevant public as a distinctive trade mark for the goods in question. In addition, in the light of the goods covered, the mark applied for would be used both in writing and orally and that the oral non-distinctiveness was even more obvious and striking than the visual non-distinctiveness. Therefore, the mark applied for is also devoid of any distinctive character within the meaning of Article 7(1)(b) of CTMR.
Posted by: Laetitia Lagarde @ 19.27
General Court, Natural Beauty, absolute grounds, Garnier,
Sharing on Social Media? Use the link below...
Reader Comments: 0
Post a Comment
MARQUES does not guarantee the accuracy of the information in this blog. The views are those of the individual contributors and do not necessarily reflect those of MARQUES. Seek professional advice before action on any information included here.
The Class 46 Archive