General Court dismisses Funline International Corp's action against EUIPO

Background of the Case

The General Court of the European Union recently ruled in favour of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) in a case brought by Funline International Corp. The applicant sought the annulment of a decision by the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO, which had revoked the trade mark JUNGLE JUICE.

Trade Mark Registration and Dispute

Funline International Corp initially registered the trade mark JUNGLE JUICE in 2009 for goods in Classes 1 and 3 under the Nice Agreement. The goods included chemicals for aphrodisiacs and various personal care products. However, in 2021, MS Trade s. r. o. applied for revocation of the mark, citing non-use in accordance with Article 58(1)(a) of Regulation 2017/1001.

EUIPO's Decision

EUIPO's Cancellation Division found that the evidence provided by Funline only demonstrated use of the mark for poppers, which were not covered by the registered classes. Consequently, the mark was revoked for all goods listed under the registration.

Funline's Appeal

Funline appealed the decision, submitting additional evidence to support the genuine use of the mark. Despite these efforts, the Board of Appeal maintained that the evidence did not demonstrate use for the registered goods, and thus upheld the revocation.

General Court's Judgment

The General Court dismissed Funline's action, agreeing with the Board of Appeal's interpretation of the Nice Classification and the scope of the trade mark. The Court concluded that the goods marketed under JUNGLE JUICE did not align with the registered categories.

Legal Representation and Procedural Issues

The intervener, MS Trade, challenged the validity of Funline's legal representation, which was ultimately dismissed by the Court. The Court confirmed that Funline's representatives were duly authorised to act before it.

Implications for Trade Mark Holders

This case underscores the importance of maintaining genuine use of a trade mark in accordance with its registered specifications. The decision highlights the necessity for trade mark holders to ensure their products align with the classes for which they are registered.

Conclusion

The General Court's ruling reinforces the autonomy of the EU trade mark system and the rigorous standards applied to maintain trade mark registrations. This case serves as a cautionary tale for businesses to diligently monitor and document the use of their registered marks.

Learn More

For more information on trade mark law, see BeCivil's guide to English Data Protection Law.