Georgi Kirov vs EUIPO

[2023] EGC 835

Revocation of an EU trade mark due to non-use.


This case concerned the revocation of an EU trade mark owned by Mr. Georgi Kirov due to alleged non-use, with the General Court examining the evidence provided and the proper reasons for non-use.


TLDR:

  • Mr. Georgi Kirov sought to annul the decision of the EUIPO's First Board of Appeal.
  • The trade mark in question was partially revoked due to non-use.
  • The General Court assessed the evidence of genuine use and proper reasons for non-use.
  • The Court upheld the decision to revoke the trade mark for certain services.


The applicant, Mr. Georgi Kirov, filed an application for registration of an EU trade mark with EUIPO on 26 November 2014. The mark was registered on 28 May 2015 for various goods and services in Classes 14, 16, 21, 35, and 43 of the Nice Agreement.


On 3 June 2020, Pasticceria Cristiani Sas di Sergio Cristiani & C. filed an application for revocation of the mark in respect of certain goods and services, claiming non-use. The Cancellation Division upheld the application and partially revoked the mark.


Mr. Kirov appealed the decision, but the Board of Appeal dismissed the appeal, stating that the applicant had not proved genuine use of the mark for the services at issue and could not rely on a proper reason for non-use.


The General Court examined the evidence provided by Mr. Kirov, including financial reports and screenshots from websites. The Court found that the evidence did not demonstrate genuine use of the mark for 'cafeterias' and 'restaurants' as required by the relevant regulations.


The Court also considered the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the use of the mark. It concluded that the 79-day period of restrictions did not constitute a proper reason for non-use that would justify the lack of genuine use over the relevant five-year period.


The Court upheld the Board of Appeal's decision to revoke the mark for the services in question, emphasizing the necessity of demonstrating genuine use to maintain trade mark rights.



Legal representatives: L. Turini for the intervener, Pasticceria Cristiani Sas di Sergio Cristiani & C.

Judicial Panel: K. Kowalik-Bańczyk, G. Hesse, B. Ricziová

Case Citation Reference: [2023] EGC 835

Tags
Intellectual Property Trade Mark Law Eu Law

Stay Current on Intellectual Property Case Law 🧑‍⚖️