Gemeenschapsmerk - Beroep tot nietigverklaring van beslissing van 12 juli 2012 van het BHIM.
Het beroep wordt verworpen. De aanvrager van het woordmerk URB heeft niet bewezen dat de interveniënt te kwader trouw heeft gehandeld. Het feit dat de interveniënt wist of behoorde te weten dat de aanvrager al gebruik maakte van het teken is op zichzelf onvoldoende om te concluderen dat de aanvrager hij te kwader trouw was. De aanvrager heeft ook niet bewezen dat het de bedoeling van de intervenient is geweest om de aanvrager uit te sluiten van de relevante markt.
44 On that point, it suffices to note that it is not disputed that the intervener marketed goods under the trade mark URB in several Member States after the date of registration at issue. Moreover, the applicant has not established that it was the intervener’s intention to exclude it from the market.
47 In that regard and by analogy, it is sufficient to note that the Court has held that the fact that the applicant knows or should know that a third party has long been using, in at least one Member State, an identical or similar sign for an identical or similar product capable of being confused with the sign for which registration is sought is not sufficient, in itself, to permit the conclusion that the applicant was acting in bad faith (judgment in Chocoladefabriken Lindt & Sprüngli, paragraph 27 above, EU:C:2009:361, paragraph 40). Since it follows from paragraphs 32 to 45 above that the other grounds put forward by the applicant are not capable of establishing bad faith on the part of the intervener, that fact is not sufficient to support such a conclusion.
48 It follows from the foregoing that the second plea in law must be rejected and the action dismissed in its entirety.
Lees het arrest hier.