The applicant sought to annul the decision of the OHIM to grant a mark, claiming it was similar to its own.
Held: Such an applicant bore the burden under the Regulation, if requested, of proving that the earlier trade mark had ‘been put to genuine use’. That meant providing evidence of real use in a substantial part of the territory protected, in an effective and consistent way over time, and as a genuine trade mark use, namely to identify the source of the goods. The applicant had failed to establish such use.
Citations:
Times 28-Dec-2002, Case T-39/01
Statutes:
Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of Dec 1993 on the Community Trade Mark
Jurisdiction:
European
Intellectual Property
Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.178620