Invalidity appeal · Board of Appeal · 2023-12-15
R1017/2023-3
Contested design: 003438852-0002
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed, and the design holder must bear the invalidity applicant's costs and fees in the invalidity and appeal proceedings.
Show verbatim operative text
1. Dismisses the appeal. 2. Orders the design holder to bear the costs and fees incurred by invalidity applicant in the invalidity and appeal proceedings.
CostsHolder ordered to pay costs
Parties
Applicant · invalidity challenger
SC STAR FOODS EM SRLvia PDF extraction
Romania (RO)
Str. Drumul Taberei Baza de Producție SIAU, Jud Ilfov, Comuna Popești Leordeni, Romania
Represented by
Holder · RCD owner
ETI GIDA SANAYI VE TICARET ANONIM SIRKETIvia PDF extraction
Türkiye (TR)
Organize Sanayi Bolgesi 11 Cadde Eskisehir, Turkey
Represented by
Adrian Căvescu
Legal grounds invoked
Argument summary
- ›The invalidity applicant relied on Romanian trade mark No 142285 KRAX and argued that the contested packaging ornamentation used a confusingly similar sign for the same market sector.
- ›The design holder argued the figurative composition, colours and extra wording differentiated the contested design and challenged the applicant's ownership and reliance on the earlier right.
- ›The Board held that the earlier mark remained valid, the contested design reproduced the dominant KRAX or CRAX element on identical or closely related goods, and confusion existed under Article 36(2)(b) of Romanian trade mark law.
- ›The appeal was dismissed and the invalidity decision was confirmed.
Deciding panel
- ChairS. Stürmann
- RapporteurC. Negro
- MemberM. Bra
- RegistrarH. Dijkema
Decision files
| Language | Type | Source link |
|---|---|---|
| frFrench | human translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| deDeutsch (de) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| esespañol (es) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| ititaliano (it) | machine translated | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
| enEnglish | original | Download original from EUIPO ↗ |
Similar decisions
Ranked by shared Locarno class + shared legal grounds + matching outcome. Click a case to view full detail.
| Case | Date | Outcome | Shared grounds | Locarno | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1063/2023-3 | 2024-11-11 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(e) | — | 5 |
| R0912/2023-3 | 2023-12-15 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(e) | — | 5 |
| R1016/2023-3 | 2023-12-14 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(e) | — | 5 |
| R2043/2019-3 | 2020-11-03 | Decision confirmed | Art 25(1)(e) | — | 5 |
| R0136/2021-3 | 2023-08-07 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(e) | — | 4 |
| R0136/2021-3 | 2022-05-31 | Case suspended | Art 25(1)(e) | — | 4 |
| R1332/2018-3 | 2018-10-30 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(e) | — | 4 |
| R1334/2018-3 | 2018-10-30 | Decision annulled | Art 25(1)(e) | — | 4 |