EU General Court rejects hotel group’s TM appeal
A Malta-based hotel group has lost an appeal before a top EU court after its trademark application was rejected for likelihood of confusion against an earlier mark.
In a judgment today, July 9, the EU General Court upheld an earlier decision by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) that Hugo’s Hotel could not register its applied-for mark because it would infringe an earlier trademark owned by H’ugo’s, a German eatery.
In 2015, Hugo’s Hotel sought to register a figurative sign made up of the colours red, black and white and the words ‘Hugo’s Burger Bar’, for goods and services including “meat burgers, fruit salads, veggie burger patties and burgers contained in bread rolls”.
The registration was opposed on grounds of likelihood of confusion by H’ugo’s, which owns a trademark for its name registered for goods such as “meat, fish, poultry, bread and services for providing food and drink”.
In its argument to the court, Hugo’s Hotel argued that the EUIPO erred in its comparison of the marks. It said the EUIPO incorrectly assessed the similarity of the marks based on the word elements of the marks and did not take the figurative elements of its applied-for mark into account.
But, the General Court said the EUIPO’s Board of Appeal was correct to find that the most distinctive element of the applied-for mark is the word ‘Hugo’s’, which has no descriptive meaning in relation to the goods covered by the mark.
Additionally, the court said the graphic elements of the applied-for mark will be perceived by the consumer as being mainly decorative.
Hugo’s Hotel said that since the mark is perceived as a whole by the consumer, the Board of Appeal could not take into account only one of the elements and exclude the figurative elements.
But, the General Court rejected this argument. It said the Board of Appeal did not take these elements into account because, “owing to their non-distinctive, weak and decorative character, their impact was limited”.
In its reasoning, the General Court referred to case-law, which states that where a trademark is composed of word elements and figurative elements, the word elements are more distinctive.
Did you enjoy reading this story? Sign up to our free daily newsletters and get stories like this sent straight to your inbox.
Today's top stories:
IP ‘missing’ from disruptive tech plans: report
