#62025TJ0267EU Court Upholds Refusal of Figurative “O” Trade Mark
AI-generated summary for informational purposes only. Not legal advice. See the original source for the authoritative text.
The judgment confirms that Osculati could not secure EU protection for its figurative “O” mark for clothing and related items where an earlier EU figurative “O” mark already covered similar clothing goods. For apparel businesses, the practical point is simple: even a short, stylised logo can be blocked if it looks close enough to an earlier mark and is used for similar products. Trade mark applicants should check earlier EU marks carefully before filing and should bring their evidence early in EUIPO proceedings.
AI-generated summary. May contain errors. Refer to official sources for legal decisions.
Key Changes
- Confirms the refusal of EU protection for Osculati’s figurative “O” mark for certain clothing goods.
- Reinforces that visual similarity between simple figurative signs can create a risk of consumer confusion when goods are similar.
- Highlights the importance of submitting facts and evidence early in EUIPO opposition proceedings.
Obligations
What this law requires
Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 allows refusal of EU trade mark protection where a later mark creates a likelihood of confusion with an earlier EU trade mark for identical or similar goods.
The General Court upheld the refusal of EU protection for Osculati Srl’s international figurative “O” mark for Class 25 clothing-related goods because of a likelihood of confusion with Olymp Bezner KG’s earlier EU figurative “O” mark.
Under Article 95(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001, facts or evidence submitted for the first time before the EUIPO Board of Appeal may be subject to discretionary treatment rather than automatic admission.