CELEX: 62002TJ0356
Community trade mark
Opposition proceedings
Earlier figurative mark including the verbal element 'Krafft'
Application for Community word mark VITAKRAFT
Relative ground for refusal
Genuine use of the earlier mark
Similarity of the signs
Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94
Rule 22(2) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95

Background to the dispute
On 5 June 1996, the applicant filed an application for a Community trade mark at the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal
Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (‘the Office’) pursuant to Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on
the Community trade mark (OJ 1994 L 11, p. 1), as amended.
The trade mark in respect of which registration was sought is the word sign VITAKRAFT.
The goods in respect of which registration of the sign was sought are in Classes 1, 3, 4, 12 and 19 of the Nice Agreement
concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks of 15 June
1957, as revised and amended, and correspond for each class to the following descriptions:
–
Class 1: ‘Chemicals used in industry, science and photography, as well as in agriculture, horticulture and forestry, in particular
chemicals and filter material of chemical, mineral, vegetable materials, unprocessed plastic materials or ceramic particles
for water treatment, in particular for aquaria and garden ponds; unprocessed artificial resins, unprocessed plastics; manures;
fire extinguishing compositions; tempering and soldering preparations; chemical substances for preserving foodstuffs; tanning
substances; adhesives used in industry’;
–
Class 3: ‘Bleaching preparations and other substances for laundry use; cleaning, polishing, scouring and abrasive preparations,
in particular sand paper for animal cages; soaps; perfumery, essential oils, cosmetics, hair lotions; dentifrices’;
–
Class 4: ‘Industrial oils and greases; lubricants; dust absorbing, wetting and binding compositions; fuels (including motor
spirit) and illuminants; candles, wicks’;
–
Class 12: ‘Vehicles; apparatus for locomotion by land, air or water’;
–
Class 19: ‘Building materials (non-metallic); non-metallic rigid pipes for building; asphalt, pitch and bitumen; non-metallic
transportable buildings; monuments, not of metal’.
The trade mark application was published in
Community Trade Marks Bulletin
No 30/98 of 27 April 1998.
On 27 July 1998, the intervener brought opposition proceedings on the basis of Article 42 of Regulation No 40/94.
The opposition was based on the figurative marks reproduced below:

A	B	C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Those marks have been registered in Spain as follows:
–
Registration No 1924081 (of sign A) of 5 May 1995 for the following goods included in Class 1: ‘Chemicals used in industry,
science and photography, as well as in agriculture, horticulture and forestry; unprocessed artificial resins, unprocessed
plastics; manures; fire extinguishing compositions; tempering and soldering preparations; chemical substances for preserving
foodstuffs; tanning substances; adhesives used in industry and specially, antifreezes, refrigerating liquids, adhesives and
sealing used in industry, dismoulding and agglomerating chemical products’ (hereinafter the ‘earlier mark A1’);
–
Registration No 1924082 (of sign A) of 5 May 1995 for the following goods included in Class 3: ‘Bleaching preparations and
other substances for laundry use; cleaning, polishing, scouring and abrasive preparations; soaps; perfumery, essential oils,
cosmetics, hair lotions; dentifrices, and specially products for cleaning vehicle motors and carburettors; wax and products
for polishing vehicles, shampoo for washing vehicles, shampoo for cleaning the upholstery of vehicles, products for cleaning
and polishing chromium-plated products, wax polishes and shine-renewing products, vehicle air fresheners’ (hereinafter the
‘earlier mark A2’);
–
Registration No 1160484 (of sign B) of 5 September 1987 for the following goods included in Class 4: ‘Industrial oils and
greases; lubricants; dust absorbing, wetting and binding compositions; fuels (including motor spirit) and illuminants; candles,
wicks’ (hereinafter the ‘earlier mark B’);
–
Registration No 1042443 (of sign C) of 20 February 1984 for goods included in Class 12: ‘Vehicles; apparatus for locomotion
by land, air or water; motors for land vehicles’ (hereinafter the ‘earlier mark C1’);
–
Registration No 1052802 (of sign C) of 20 July 1984 for goods included in Class 19: ‘Building materials (non-metallic); non-metallic
rigid pipes for building; asphalt, pitch and bitumen; non-metallic transportable buildings; monuments, not of metal’ (hereinafter
the ‘earlier sign C2’).
The applicant requested that the intervener prove that the earlier marks B, C1 and C2 were put to genuine use in accordance
with Article 43(2) and (3) of Regulation No 40/94. Following that request, the intervener produced 18 catalogues relating
to various products from its range.
By Decision No 317/2000 of 24 February 2000, the Opposition Division partially upheld the opposition after establishing the
identity of the goods and services included in Classes 1 and 3, then recognised the similarity of the signs and consequently
found that there was a likelihood of confusion. However, it rejected the opposition in so far as it related to goods in Classes
4, 12 and 19 on the ground that the intervener had not provided sufficient proof of use of the earlier marks B, C1 and C2
and, in particular, of the extent and duration of that use.
On 26 April 2000, the intervener appealed against the decision of the Opposition Division, claiming principally that the Opposition
Division had erred in finding that the proof of use of the earlier marks for the goods in Classes 4, 12 and 19 was insufficient.
Furthermore, the intervener, pointing out the similarity between the goods in Classes 1 and 3 covered by the earlier marks
and the contested goods in Classes 4, 12 and 19 as specified in the application for registration, requested that that application
be rejected in respect also of the goods in Classes 4, 12 and 19.
By letter of 5 May 2000, the applicant appealed against the decision of the Opposition Division, its main complaint being
that the Opposition Division had held that there was similarity between the signs.
By decision of 4 September 2002 in Joined Cases R 506/2000-4 and R 581/2000-4 (‘the contested decision’), the Fourth Board
of Appeal of the Office, considering that genuine use of marks B and C2 by the intervener had been proved for part of the
goods, namely for ‘lubricants, greases, motor oils’ included in Class 4 and for ‘mortar and levelling paste for construction’
included in Class 19, partially annulled the decision of the Opposition Division. It held that there was a similarity between
the goods ‘industrial oils and greases; lubricants; fuels (including motor spirit) and illuminants’ in Class 4, referred to
in the application for the mark, and the goods for which use of the earlier mark B had been proved. Furthermore, the Board
of Appeal found that there was a similarity between ‘cleaning preparations’ in Class 3 and covered by the earlier mark A2
and ‘dust absorbing, wetting and binding compositions’ in Class 4, referred to in the application for registration. It found
also that there was a similarity between the goods ‘building materials (non-metallic); non-metallic rigid pipes for building;
asphalt, pitch and bitumen’ covered by the mark applied for and ‘mortar and levelling paste for construction’ in respect of
which the intervener had proved use of the earlier mark C2. Taking the view that the decision of the Opposition Division was
correct in its finding that there was a likelihood of confusion owing to the similarity between the signs and goods in question,
the Board of Appeal dismissed the applicant’s appeal in its entirety. It also partially dismissed the intervener’s appeal,
firstly on the ground that the intervener had not proved genuine use of the earlier mark C1 or of earlier marks B and C2 in
respect of goods other than ‘industrial oils and greases; lubricants’ (Class 4) and ‘mortar and levelling paste for construction’
(Class 19) and, secondly, that certain disputed goods in Classes 4, 12 and 19 were not similar to the goods and services covered
by the earlier marks A1, A2 and C2, in Classes 1, 3 and 19. Essentially, registration of the Community trade mark was refused
for the following goods included in the Community trade mark application: all goods in Classes 1 and 3 of the Nice Agreement
and ‘industrial oils and greases; lubricants; dust absorbing, wetting and binding compositions; fuels (including motor spirit)
and illuminants’ (Class 4) and ‘building materials (non-metallic); non-metallic rigid pipes for building; asphalt, pitch and
bitumen’ (Class 19).
Procedure and forms of order sought by the parties
On 8 January 2003, the intervener requested that English be designated the language of the case. As the application and the
application for registration were in German, that request was refused and, in accordance with Article 131(1) and the third
subparagraph of Article 131(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, German became the language of the
case.
The applicant claims that the Court of First Instance should:
–
partially annul the contested decision in so far as the appeal of Krafft, SA was allowed and in so far as the applicant’s
appeal was not allowed;
–
order the Office to pay the costs.
The Office and the intervener contend that the Court of First Instance should:
–
dismiss the action;
–
order the applicant to pay the costs.
Law
In support of its action, the applicant puts forward two pleas in law. The first plea in law alleges infringement of Article
43(2) and (3) of Regulation No 40/94 and of Rule 22(2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 of 13 December 1995 implementing
Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Community trade mark (OJ 1995 L 303, p. 1); the second plea in law alleges infringement
of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94.
The first plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 43(2) and (3) of Regulation No 40/94 and of Rule 22(2) of Regulation
No 2868/95
Arguments of the parties
The applicant claims that the intervener has not proved that the earlier marks were put to genuine use in respect of the products
‘greases and motor oils; lubricants’ and ‘mortar and levelling paste for construction’.
With regard to the catalogue relating to motor oils supposedly printed in 1992, this is not within the material period which
runs from 28 April 1993 to 28 April 1998.
By contrast, the catalogues supposedly printed in 1993, 1994 and 1996 do not, according to the applicant, contain anything
relating to the use of the earlier marks for the products ‘motor oils and greases’ in Class 4 or for ‘mortar and levelling
paste for construction’ in Class 19.
The applicant concedes that the catalogues in question contain certain indications relating to ‘lubricants’. However, it points
out that those indications do not meet the requirements of Rule 22(2) of Regulation No 2868/95. The evidence relates only
to the years 1993 to 1996 and not to 1997 and 1998. The applicant considers that, where proof of use of the mark relates only
to part of the material period, it is essential that the holder of the earlier marks should at least show that, during that
period, the use was extensive. The intervener has furnished no viable evidence regarding the extent of the use of the earlier
marks.
The Office notes that four of the catalogues produced by the intervener during the opposition proceedings enable conclusions
to be drawn regarding the duration, nature and place of the use, namely:
–
Catalogue 1, entitled ‘Emergiendo con fuerza’, relating to motor oils, printed in 1992, which indicates that the prices mentioned
apply only with effect from January 1993;
–
Catalogue 2, entitled ‘Lubricantes para automoción’, concerning lubricants, which was published in 1993;
–
Catalogue 3, entitled ‘Lubricantes automoción’, concerning greases and lubricants;
–
Catalogue 4, entitled ‘Suelos industriales’, from 1997, relating to mortars and levelling pastes for construction.
The Office doubts, however, that the catalogues in question contain any useful indications as to the extent of the use of
the earlier marks, such indications being required under Rule 22(2) of Regulation No 2868/95 in order to distinguish genuine
use of the marks from purely fictitious use. In the Office’s view, the production of advertising material may, in principle,
constitute sufficient proof. The Office wonders, however, whether it is necessary to give indications regarding the extent
of the circulation of the advertising materials. It recognises that, in the present case, such indications are not available.
The intervener concurs with the reasoning given by the Board of Appeal. It considers, in particular, that the requirements
of Rule 22(2) of Regulation No 2868/95 were met. The indication and proof of the place of use is clear from the indication
of the intervener’s representatives in various towns in Spain. The duration of the use is indicated and proved by the dates
of printing of the catalogues. As regards the nature of the use, the catalogues show the goods bearing the earlier marks B
and C2.
The intervener conceded, at the hearing, that the catalogues did not contain any indication relating to the extent of the
use. Furthermore, it did not maintain the argument that proof of use follows from the fact that its marks were known on the
Spanish market. However, it points out that it is required to show only that the use made of the earlier marks B and C2 is
not a fictitious use intended only to keep them on the register. The intervener added, also at the hearing, that, according
to the Office’s practice, objective proof should be furnished, such as, for example, catalogues or invoices. It explained
that its invoices showed only the names of the goods, without indicating the mark, because it sold only goods bearing the
Krafft mark, so that the mark does not distinguish the various products in its range. The intervener therefore opted to show
the use of the earlier marks by way of the advertising material which it produced at the time of the OHIM proceedings.
Findings of the Court
As is apparent from the ninth recital in the preamble to Regulation No 40/94, the legislature considered that there is no
justification for protecting earlier trade marks except where the marks are actually used. Consistent with that recital, Article
43(2) and (3) of Regulation No 40/94 provides that an applicant for a Community trade mark may request proof that the earlier
mark has been put to genuine use in the territory where it is protected during the period of five years preceding the date
of publication of the trade mark application against which an opposition has been filed (Case T-39/01
Kabushiki Kaisha Fernandes
v
OHIM
–
Harrison (HIWATT)
[2002] ECR II-5233, paragraph 34).
As is apparent from the judgment in Case C-40/01
Ansul
[2003] ECR I‑2439, paragraph 43, there is ‘genuine use’ of a mark where it is used in accordance with its essential function,
which is to guarantee the identity of the origin of the goods or services for which it is registered, in order to create or
preserve an outlet for those goods or services; genuine use does not include token use for the sole purpose of preserving
the rights conferred by the mark. Furthermore, the condition of genuine use of the mark requires that the mark, as protected
on the relevant territory, be used publicly and outwardly (see
Ansul
, paragraph 37, and Case T‑174/01
Goulbourn
v
OHIM
–
Redcats (Silk Cocoon)
[2003] ECR II-789, paragraph 39).
Pursuant to Rule 22(2) of Regulation No 2868/95, proof of use must relate to the place, time, extent and nature of the use
made of the earlier mark.
Furthermore, the Court of First Instance has held that genuine use of a trade mark cannot be proved by means of probabilities
or suppositions, but must be demonstrated by solid and objective evidence of effective and sufficient use of the trade mark
on the market concerned (
HIWATT
, cited above, paragraph 47).
It is in the light of those considerations that the Court must assess whether, in the present case, the Board of Appeal did
not err in law in considering that the intervener had provided proof of genuine use of the earlier marks B and C2 for the
products ‘motor oils and greases; lubricants’ (Class 4) and for the products ‘mortar and levelling paste for construction’
(Class 19). The Court notes, in that regard, that the intervener has not complained that the Board of Appeal regarded those
earlier marks as being registered only for the goods in respect of which, in the view of the Board of Appeal, the intervener
had given concrete proof of use and not for the entire category to which those goods belong and for which those earlier marks
were registered. With regard to the earlier mark C1 and the other goods covered by the earlier marks B and C2, as the intervener
did not contest the findings of the Board of Appeal that the use of the marks in connection with them had not been shown,
those findings do not form part of the present dispute.
Firstly, it should be noted that, as the application for the Community trade mark was published on 27 April 1998, the period
of five years runs from 27 April 1993 to 26 April 1998. Secondly, since the earlier marks B and C2 are protected by Spanish
registration, the relevant territory is that of Spain. It follows that the intervener is required to show that its earlier
marks were used on the Spanish market between 27 April 1993 and 26 April 1998.
The Board of Appeal considered, in paragraph 14 of the contested decision, that it had no reason to doubt that the catalogues
produced by the intervener reflected the marketing during the relevant period of time of the products represented in those
catalogues under the depicted mark. Furthermore, it considered, in paragraph 16 of the contested decision, that catalogues
that bear dates included within the relevant period, that represent the opponent’s products, that show the opponent’s trade
mark used in the same form as registered, that show how the mark is applied on the products, that list wholesalers in a wide
range of places within the territory concerned and that clearly associate the opponent with its mark do show satisfactorily,
for the purposes of Article 43(2) of Regulation No 40/94, that the earlier mark was put to genuine use.
That reasoning is erroneous in that it is based upon presumptions.
It follows from the case-law cited in paragraph 26 above that it is appropriate to examine whether the intervener has shown,
in the proceedings before the Office, that its earlier marks B and C2, as protected, were used on the relevant territory publicly
and outwardly for the purpose of creating or preserving an outlet for those goods or services covered by the marks. Pursuant
to Rule 22(2) of Regulation No 2868/95, that proof must relate in particular to the extent of that use. Finally, it is not
sufficient for genuine use to appear probable or credible; actual proof of that use must be given.
In the present case, the catalogues submitted to the Board of Appeal establish neither the fact that they were distributed
to a potential Spanish clientele, nor the extent of any distribution, nor the number of sales made of goods protected by the
mark. The intervener has provided no indication supported by evidence to enable any useful conclusions to be drawn in that
regard. The mere existence of those catalogues could, at most, make it probable or credible that goods protected by the earlier
marks were sold or, at least, offered for sale within the relevant territory, but it cannot prove that fact.
It must therefore be found that the Board of Appeal erred in law by regarding the catalogues produced by the intervener as
sufficient proof, without its being necessary to ascertain whether the catalogues contain satisfactory indications concerning
the goods ‘motor oils and greases’ and ‘mortar and levelling paste for construction’, or concerning the duration of the use.
Consequently, the first plea in law of the applicant is well founded. The Board of Appeal was therefore wrong to allow in
part the intervener’s appeal against the decision of the Opposition Division. It follows that the contested decision should
be annulled in so far as it allowed the intervener’s appeal before the Board of Appeal concerning the goods ‘industrial oils
and greases; lubricants; fuels (including motor spirit) and illuminants’ (Class 4) and the goods ‘building materials (not
metallic); non-metallic rigid pipes for building, asphalt, pitch and bitumen’ (Class 19) included in the Community trade mark
application.
The second plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94
Arguments of the parties
The applicant considers that the Board of Appeal made an incorrect comparative analysis of the two signs at issue.
Firstly, the earlier marks are both word and figurative marks, consisting of a rectangle of the colours red, blue and white,
divided into two equal parts, the upper part of which bears the inscription ‘krafft’ in white on a red background and the
lower part of which is a blue area. Although the applicant concedes that the distinctive and dominant element of the earlier
marks is the name ‘Krafft’, it maintains that the Board of Appeal erred in considering that that graphic element would be
totally ignored and forgotten by the average consumer.
Secondly, the applicant points out that, according to case-law, the mark is normally perceived as a whole. The average consumer
does not undertake an analysis of its various details. The applicant therefore contests the view of the Board of Appeal that
a Spanish consumer would decompose the mark applied for into ‘vita’ and ‘kraft’. Furthermore, even assuming that the consumer
did undertake such an analysis, he would not be likely to omit the term ‘vita’ and retain only the term ‘kraft’. In that regard,
the applicant points out that the word ‘vita’ is not descriptive of the goods intended to be covered by the requested mark.
It submits that although it is true that the part of a complex mark which is descriptive of the goods and services covered
cannot in principle be regarded as the dominant element of the mark, that argument does not apply to the present case. On
that basis, the word ‘vita’ is not of secondary importance. It follows, in the applicant’s view, that the conflicting marks
display, from the point of view of their graphic and verbal elements, sufficient differences to make them distinctive.
Thirdly, the applicant considers that the conflicting signs are sufficiently different on an auditory level since the requested
sign will be pronounced ‘vitakraft’ whilst the verbal element of the earlier signs is pronounced ‘krafft’.
Finally, the applicant considers that there is also an obvious conceptual difference between the signs at issue. The earlier
signs will be perceived, by a Spanish consumer, as simply an invented term. By contrast, the requested sign evokes the idea
of vitality (‘vitalidad’ in Spanish), or even the adjective ‘vital’ (‘vital’ in Spanish).
The Office and the intervener agree entirely with the reasoning of the Board of Appeal.
The intervener notes, in particular, that the prefix ‘vita’ is an everyday concept which is not very distinctive and that,
in Spanish, the main stress, in the pronunciation of ‘vitakraft’, falls on the syllable ‘kraft’.
Findings of the Court
Since the applicant’s first plea in law is well founded, it is necessary only to assess the likelihood of confusion between
the requested sign and the earlier marks A1 and A2 (‘the earlier marks’) which are not subject to the requirement of proof
that they have been put to genuine use because, at the date of publication of the Community trade mark application, they had
been registered for less than five years (Article 43(2) and (3) of Regulation No 40/94).
Within the meaning of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94, upon opposition by the proprietor of an earlier trade mark,
the trade mark applied for is not to be registered if because of its identity with or similarity to the earlier trade mark
and the identity or similarity of the goods or services covered by the trade marks there exists a likelihood of confusion
on the part of the public in the territory in which the earlier trade mark is protected.
According to established case-law, the risk that the public might believe that the goods or services in question come from
the same undertaking or, as the case may be, from economically-linked undertakings, constitutes a likelihood of confusion.
According to the same line of case-law, the likelihood of confusion must be assessed globally, according to the perception
that the relevant public has of the signs and the products or services at issue, and taking into account all factors relevant
to the circumstances of the case, in particular the interdependence of the similarity between the signs and the similarity
between the goods or services covered (see Case T-162/01
Laboratorios RTB
v
OHIM – Giorgio Beverly Hills (GIORGIO BEVERLY HILLS)
[2003] ECR II-2821, paragraphs 31 to 33, and the case-law cited).
It should be noted that the findings of the Board of Appeal relating to the similarity between the products were not contested
by the applicant or the intervener. The outcome of the appeal depends, therefore, on whether there is a likelihood of confusion
because of a similarity between the signs. The products involved in the assessment of the similarity between the signs are
all those in Classes 1 and 3 of the Nice Agreement mentioned in the Community trade mark application and the ‘dust absorbing,
wetting and binding compositions’ (Class 4) which the Board of Appeal considered similar to ‘cleaning, polishing, scouring
and abrasive preparations’ protected by the earlier mark A2 and included in Class 3.
It is clear from established case-law that the global assessment of the likelihood of confusion, as far as concerns the visual,
aural or conceptual similarity of the conflicting marks, must be based on the overall impression given by the marks, bearing
in mind, inter alia, their distinctive and dominant components (see judgment of 14 October 2003 in Case T-292/01
Phillips-Van Heusen
v
OHIM
–
Pash Textilvertrieb und Einzelhandel (BASS)
[2003] ECR II-0000, paragraph 47, and the case-law cited).
As regards, firstly, the visual aspect of the earlier marks, the Board of Appeal rightly held that the dominant element of
those marks, despite their figurative nature, consists of the word ‘Krafft’. The figurative elements of the earlier signs,
namely the graphics of the work ‘Krafft’, on the one hand, and the blue and red rectangles, on the other hand, are not sufficiently
large to make a greater impression on the consumer than their verbal element.
The requested sign consists, for a Spanish-speaking consumer, of a word composed of two elements, the first of which is the
term ‘vita’ and the second the term ‘kraft’. The Board of Appeal rightly held that a consumer, perceiving a verbal sign, will
break it down into elements which, for him, suggest a concrete meaning or which resemble words known to him. Thus the term
‘vita’ will be perceived, by a Spanish-speaking consumer, as alluding to words such as ‘vitality’ or ‘vital’ (‘vitalidad’
or ‘vital’ in Spanish). However, although the term ‘kraft’ means ‘strength’ in certain languages, including German, it has
no concrete meaning in the Spanish language.
The Court notes that, as a general rule, an invented word is more likely to draw the attention of the consumer (see, to that
effect, Case T-6/01
Matratzen Concord
v
OHIM
–
Hukla Germany (MATRATZEN)
[2002] ECR II-4335, paragraph 43, upheld by order of the Court of Justice of 28 April 2004 in Case C-3/03 P
Matratzen Concord
v
OHIM
[2004] ECR I-0000). The Court of First Instance has also observed that the public will not generally consider a descriptive
element forming part of a complex mark as the distinctive and dominant element of the overall impression conveyed by that
mark (judgment of 3 July 2003 in Case T‑129/01
Alejandro
v
OHIM
–
Anheuser-Busch (BUDMEN)
[2003] ECR II-2251, paragraph 53). Analogous considerations apply to elements which have a very general meaning suggesting
a positive quality attributable to a large range of different goods or services. The Court of First Instance considers that,
for the Spanish public, the word ‘vita’ would be included in that category of elements.
It follows that, in Spanish, the dominant element of the sign requested is the second part, ‘kraft’, because it is an invented
term and because, for the target public, the first part of the sign, ‘vita’, is less distinctive.
With regard to the phonetic aspect, the earlier marks are pronounced ‘Krafft’. By contrast, the sign requested comprises three
syllables, (‘vi’, ‘ta’ and ‘kraft’). For the reasons set out in paragraphs 52 and 53 above, the target public will perceive
the last syllable of the sign requested, namely the word ‘kraft’, as the preponderant element of the word sign VITAKRAFT.
It follows, both from the visual and auditory points of view, that the preponderant element of the sign requested, ‘kraft’,
and the verbal element of the earlier marks, ‘Krafft’, are very similar, if not identical, the two ‘f’s in the word ‘Krafft’
making no perceptible phonetic difference or sufficient visual difference to dissipate the elements of similarity set out
above.
With regard to the conceptual aspect, although it is true that the word ‘vita’ evokes the notion of ‘vitality’ or the adjective
‘vital’, none the less the sign VITAKRAFT has no specific meaning in the Spanish language. Given that neither the mark requested
nor the earlier marks have any concrete meaning in that language, no sufficient conceptual difference between the signs is
apparent.
It follows that, for the target public, consisting of Spanish-speaking consumers, the signs at issue are similar on the visual
and phonetic levels. Since the goods covered by the marks at issue are identical or very similar, the Board of Appeal did
not err in law in finding that there was a likelihood of confusion between the earlier marks including the element ‘Krafft’
and the mark requested, VITAKRAFT, in respect of all the goods in Classes 1 and 3 mentioned in the Community trade mark application
and the ‘dust absorbing, wetting and binding compositions’ in Class 4.
Consequently, the applicant’s second plea in law must be rejected.
It follows that the action is well founded only in so far as the Board of Appeal held, wrongly, that the intervener had provided
proof of genuine use of the earlier marks B for the goods ‘motor oils and greases; lubricants’ (Class 4) and C2 for the goods
‘mortar and levelling paste for construction’ (Class 19). Consequently, the contested decision should be annulled in so far
as it allowed the intervener’s appeal before the Board of Appeal concerning the goods ‘industrial oils and greases; lubricants;
fuels (including motor spirit) and illuminants’ (Class 4) and the goods ‘building materials (not metallic); non-metallic rigid
pipes for building, asphalt, pitch and bitumen’ (Class 19) contained in the Community trade mark application. The remainder
of the action must be dismissed.
Costs
Pursuant to Article 87(3) of the Rules of Procedure, the Court of First Instance may order that the costs be shared or that
each party bear its own costs where each party succeeds on some and fails on other heads.
In the present case, the applicant, the Office and the intervener all failed in part of their claims. Consequently, it is
appropriate to order each party to bear its own costs.
On those grounds,
THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE (Second Chamber)
hereby:
1.
Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and
Designs) of 4 September 2002 (Joined Cases R 506/2000-4 and R 581/2000-4) in so far as it allowed the intervener’s appeal
before the Board of Appeal concerning the goods ‘industrial oils and greases; lubricants; fuels (including motor spirit) and
illuminants’ (Class 4) and the goods ‘building materials (not metallic); non-metallic rigid pipes for building, asphalt, pitch
and bitumen’ (Class 19) contained in the Community trade mark application;
2.
Dismisses the remainder of the action;
3.
Orders the parties to bear their own costs.
Pirrung
Meij
Forwood
Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 6 October 2004.
H. Jung
J. Pirrung
Registrar
President
–
Language of the case: German.