Gepubliceerd op woensdag 4 juni 2014
IEF 13906
De weergave van dit artikel is misschien niet optimaal, omdat deze is overgenomen uit onze oudere databank.

Facturen en catalogi leveren bewijs tegen non-usus van SENSUS

OHIM 30 mei 2014, IEF 13906 (Swiss Sense tegen Rectitel)
Beslissing ingezonden door Gert Jan van de Kamp, Park Legal. Merkenrecht. Non-usus deels aangenomen. Swiss Sense roept ingevolge artikel 51 lid 1 onder a Gemeenschapsmerkenverordening (non-usus) het verval in van Gemeenschapsmerk SENSUS van Recticel. Het OHIM, onder verwijzing naar onder meer het arrest C-12/12 [IEF 12574](SM Jeans/Levi’s), oordeelt dat Recticel normaal gebruik heeft gemaakt van haar Gemeenschapsmerk SENSUS voor onder meer matrassen, matrasvullingen en hoofdkussens. De door Recticel overlegde facturen en catalogi leveren bewijs van (normaal) merkgebruik op voor onder andere Nederland, België, Luxemburg, Zweden en Frankrijk. Voor andere producten in de klassen 10, 17 en 20 volgt gedeeltelijk de nietigverklaring van het merk.

Place of use:
“The evidence shows that the place of use has been different member countries of the European Union. This can be inferred from, for example, the invoices, which are submitted to customers in Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Sweden and France. Furthermore, the product catalogues are issued for the public in Benelux, which is indicated for example by the web address www.beka.be, which can be seen in the catalogues.  Consequently, as the use has been clearly shown in different member countries of the European Union, it is concluded that the evidence of use filed by the proprietor contains sufficient indications concerning the place of use.”

Nature of use:
“(...)The Cancellation Division also notices that the contested CTM is used together with other trade marks, such as “UBICA” or “BEKA”. However, there is no legal precept in the Community trade mark system which obliges the proprietor to provide evidence of the earlier mark alone when genuine use is required. Two or more trade marks may be used together in an autonomous way, with or without the company name, without altering the distinctive character of the earlier registered trade mark. The Court has confirmed that the condition of genuine use of a registered trade mark may be satisfied both where it has been used as part of another composite mark or when it is used in conjunction with another mark, even if the combination of marks is itself registered as a trade mark (judgment of 18/04/2013, C-12/12, ‘SM JEANS/LEVI’S’, para 36).”
Global assessment:
“When reviewing the evidence in its entirety, especially taking into account the invoices during the relevant time period and the fact that they indicate the economic extent of use relating to the genuine use of the earlier trade mark in part of the relevant market, it is considered that the evidence shows use of the earlier trade mark to a sufficient extent. This finding is supported by the evidence showing the catalogues of the products (indicating the nature of the use). “