- AG opines on scope of review by General Court (Primart v EUIPO)
- What are the practical implications of this opinion?
- What was the background?
- What did the AG opine?
- Case details
IP analysis: The Advocate General has opined that the Court of Justice should uphold an appeal against a decision of the General Court in opposition proceedings, on the basis that the General Court had erred in law in its application of Article 76(1) of Regulation (EC) 207/2009. The General Court had held that certain arguments made by the trade mark applicant in relation to the inherent distinctiveness of the earlier mark relied on in the proceedings were inadmissible because they had not been put forward before the Board of Appeal. However, the Advocate General opined that a failure to take into account relevant factors when assessing the distinctiveness of the earlier mark constituted an error of law which could properly be challenged before the General Court.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial