JUDGMENT OF THE GENERAL COURT (First Chamber)

29 March 2017 ([\*](#Footnote*))

(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — EU figurative mark J&JOY — Earlier national figurative mark joy SPORTSWEAR — Relative grounds for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the goods — Similarity of the signs — Assessment criteria — Composite mark — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

In Case T‐389/15,

**J & Joy SA,** established in Waremme (Belgium), represented by A. Maqua, C. Pirenne and C. Smits, lawyers,

applicant,

v

**European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO),** represented by H. O’Neill, acting as Agent,

defendant,

the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court, being

**Joy-Sportswear GmbH,** established in Ottensoos (Germany), represented by T. Kiphuth, lawyer,

ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 April 2015 (Case R 1355/2014-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Joy-Sportswear and J & Joy,

THE GENERAL COURT (First Chamber),

composed of I. Pelikánová, President, P. Nihoul (Rapporteur) and J. Svenningsen, Judges,

Registrar: E. Coulon,

having regard to the application lodged at the Court Registry on 15 July 2015,

having regard to the response of EUIPO lodged at the Court Registry on 22 December 2015,

having regard to the response of the intervener lodged at the Court Registry on 28 December 2015,

having regard to the fact that no request for a hearing was submitted by the main parties within three weeks after service of notification of the close of the written part of the procedure, and having decided to rule on the action without an oral part of the procedure, pursuant to Article 106(3) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court,

gives the following

**Judgment**

**Background to the dispute**

1        The present proceedings concern a dispute arising from an application for registration of the figurative mark J&JOY as an EU trade mark and an alleged likelihood of confusion with the figurative mark joy SPORTSWEAR which existed previously: The mark applied for and the earlier mark are reproduced below:

– the mark applied for:

![Image not found](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)

– the earlier mark:

![Image not found](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=)

2        The application for registration was filed on 10 December 2012 by the applicant, J & Joy SA, with the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) pursuant to Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the European Union trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1).

3        The goods concerned by that application were in, inter alia, Classes 18 and 25 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 corresponded, for each of those classes, to the following description:

–        Class 18: ‘Goods made of these materials [leather and imitations of leather] and not included in other classes; purses; key cases; attache cases; card cases [notecases]; pouch baby carriers; briefcases; pocket wallets; sling bags for carrying infants; slings for carrying infants; handbags; bags for sports’;

–        Class 25: ‘Clothing, footwear, headgear; motorists’ clothing; bathing caps; swimsuits; bath robes; bath sandals; bath slippers; bandanas [neckerchiefs]; headbands [clothing]; stockings; stockings (sweat-absorbent -); bibs, not of paper; berets; smocks; boas [necklets]; teddies [undergarments]; hosiery; caps [headwear]; shower caps; boots; half-boots; suspenders; lace boots; collar protectors; camisoles; pants; bathing trunks; skull caps; bodices [lingerie]; hoods [clothing]; belts [clothing]; money belts [clothing]; shawls; footmuffs, not electrically heated; sweaters; hats; paper hats [clothing]; headgear for wear; chasubles; socks; slippers; footwear; football boots; beach shoes; ski boots; boots for sports; shirts; short-sleeve shirts; tights; shoulder wraps; slips [undergarments]; combinations [clothing]; wet suits for water-skiing; ready-made clothing; corselets; corsets [underclothing]; suits; masquerade costumes; ear muffs [clothing]; neckties; breeches for wear; babies’ pants [clothing]; cyclists’ clothing; dress shields; outerclothing; sashes for wear; shirt yokes; esparto shoes or sandals; fur stoles; detachable collars; sock suspenders; scarfs; furs [clothing]; gabardines [clothing]; girdles; galoshes; gloves [clothing]; ski gloves; vests; spats; wimples; gymnastic shoes; clothing; top hats; waterproof clothing; leg warmers; stocking suspenders; garters; jerseys [clothing]; skirts; skorts; petticoats; ascots; layettes [clothing]; leggings [trousers]; liveries; singlets; cuffs; muffs [clothing]; maniples; coats; mantillas; sleep masks; mittens; miters [hats]; topcoats; trousers; parkas; dressing gowns; pelerines; pelisses; beach clothes; shirt fronts; pockets for clothing; pocket squares; ponchos; pullovers; pyjamas; dresses; jumper dresses; wooden shoes; sandals; saris; sarongs; underpants; shoes; gaiter straps; underwear; underwear (anti-sweat -); brassieres; sports shoes; aprons [clothing]; tee-shirts; togas; knitwear [clothing]; turbans; uniforms; stuff jackets [clothing]; jackets [clothing]; fishing vests; clothing for gymnastics; clothing of leather; clothing of imitations of leather; paper clothing; cap peaks; veils [clothing]’.

4        The application for registration was published in *Community Trade Marks Bulletin* No 5/2013 of 8 January 2013.

5        On 26 March 2013, the intervener, Joy-Sportswear GmbH, filed a notice of opposition to registration of the mark applied for in respect of the goods referred to in paragraph 3 above. It based that opposition on, inter alia, the German figurative mark joy SPORTSWEAR, registered on 7 September 2011 under number 302011036716 and filed on 6 July 2011 in respect of goods in Class 25 of the Nice Agreement and corresponding to the following description: ‘Clothing, headgear’.

6        On 28 March 2014, the Opposition Division partially upheld the opposition, on the basis of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009, considering that there was a likelihood of confusion between the earlier mark and the mark applied for as regards the goods referred to in paragraph 3 of the present judgment. By contrast, it rejected the opposition in respect of the other goods covered by the application for registration.

7        The applicant challenged that decision of the opposition division, on 26 May 2014, before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO.

8        By decision of 22 April 2015 (‘the contested decision’), the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO dismissed the appeal. In its decision, the Board of Appeal held that, given the identity or similarity between the goods in question, the overall similarity between the signs at issue and the average distinctive character of the earlier trade mark, a significant part of the relevant public could be misled into thinking, wrongly, that the goods in question bearing the mark applied for and the earlier mark come from the same undertaking or from undertakings that are economically linked.

**Forms of order sought**

9        In the application initiating proceedings, the applicant claims that the Court should:

–        review the decision of the Opposition Division and declare the opposition inadmissible;

–        order the intervener to bear the costs and to pay the costs incurred by the applicant in the administrative proceedings before the Opposition Division.

10      EUIPO and the intervener contend that the Court should:

–        dismiss the application;

–        order the applicant to pay the costs.

11      After being asked in the context of a measure of organisation of procedure to state precisely the subject matter of its application, the applicant, after the other parties had been heard, stated that the form of order sought should be understood as a claim that the Court should:

–        annul the contested decision;

–        order the intervener to pay the costs, including the costs incurred before the Board of Appeal.

12      In the context of that measure of organisation of procedure, EUIPO stated that it did not dispute that the application could be interpreted as seeking annulment of the contested decision. It thus implicitly withdrew the objection of inadmissibility raised in its response. As regards costs, it stated that the applicant’s initial form of order sought could be interpreted, at most, as claiming that the intervener should be ordered to pay the costs incurred before the Board of Appeal.

13      Since the parties have agreed on the scope of the first head of claim, it must be held that the application is for annulment of the contested decision. As regards costs, the views of the parties differ. Their claims in respect of that point will be examined in the light of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, after examining the substance of the case.

**Law**

14      In support of its action, the applicant relies on a single plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009. It claims, in essence, that the Board of Appeal was wrong to conclude that there is a likelihood of confusion.

15      Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 provides that, upon opposition by the proprietor of an earlier trade mark, the trade mark applied for must not be registered if there exists a likelihood of confusion on the part of the public in the territory in which the earlier trade mark is protected, because of the identity or similarity of the two marks, or the identity or similarity of the goods or services covered by them.

16      In order to assess whether there is a likelihood of confusion, it is necessary to identify the public concerned by the potential confusion, determine the goods concerned and examine the extent to which the marks concerned may be associated, by that public and in respect of those goods, to an extent precluding registration (see judgment of 22 January 2009, *Commercy* v *OHIM — easyGroup IP Licensing (easyHotel)*, T‐316/07, EU:T:2009:14, paragraph 42 and the case-law cited).

*The relevant public*

17      According to the contested decision, Germany is the relevant territory to be considered for the purposes of resolving the dispute.

18      That analysis is disputed by the applicant, which claims that the relevant public should be extended to include all consumers in the European Union, Switzerland and Norway.

19      In that regard, it should be noted that, in accordance with Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009, it is necessary to assess the likelihood of confusion on the part of the public in the territory where the earlier trade mark is protected.

20      In the present case, the earlier mark, on which the contested decision is based, is a German trade mark.

21      It follows that, in accordance with the criterion referred to in that provision, the relevant public to be taken into consideration is, as indicated in the contested decision, made up of German consumers.

*The degree of attention paid to the goods concerned*

22      The Board of Appeal considered that the marks at issue were mass-consumption goods, frequently purchased and used by the average consumer in the relevant territory. It concluded that the degree of attention paid to those goods is no higher than average.

23      The applicant, in turn, maintains that the goods concerned are aimed at ‘young and trendy’ consumers who can translate the words in the mark applied for and understand the message conveyed in a specific manner.

24      EUIPO and the intervener dispute the applicant’s arguments.

25      In that regard, it is necessary to distinguish the category of consumers targeted by an undertaking in the context of its commercial strategy and the type of consumers to be taken into account in assessing whether there is a likelihood of confusion.

26      The commercial strategy of the trade mark applicant cannot bind the authorities responsible for assessing a likelihood of confusion for the purposes of taking a position on an opposition to registration.

27      In order to assess that likelihood of confusion, it is necessary to apply the criteria laid down in the abovementioned regulation and contained in the relevant case-law.

28      It follows from that case-law that an assessment of the likelihood of confusion must be based on the perception of the marks by the average consumer obtaining goods belonging to the category of the goods concerned. According to the case-law, that consumer must be considered reasonably well informed and reasonably observant and circumspect (see judgment of 4 May 2016, *Bodegas Williams & Humbert* v *EUIPO — Central Hisumer (Botanic Williams & Humbert)*, T‐193/15, not published, EU:T:2016:266, paragraph 17 and the case-law cited).

29      That category was certainly the one taken into account by the Board of Appeal in its decision and its assessment on that point must consequently be upheld.

*The goods concerned*

30      According to the contested decision, the goods covered by the mark applied for and the earlier mark respectively, in so far as they fall within the scope of the action before the second Board of Appeal of EUIPO are identical or similar.

31      That assessment is disputed by the applicant, which, in support of its position, highlights differences in nature and purpose between the goods covered by its mark and the goods sold by the intervener, analyses the competitive or complementary nature of those goods and seeks to show that those goods are marketed through different intermediaries.

32      EUIPO and the intervener dispute the applicant’s arguments.

33      For the purposes of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009, any similarity between the goods or services covered by the mark applied for and by the earlier mark respectively must be examined with reference to the goods or services in the classes corresponding to the marks at issue.

34      By contrast, contrary to the applicant’s claim, that similarity should not be assessed in the light of the goods or services actually marketed under those marks (see judgment of 31 January 2013, *Present-Service Ullrich* v *OHIM — Punt Nou (babilu)*, T‐66/11, not published, EU:T:2013:48, paragraph 45 and the case-law cited).

35      It follows that the applicant’s arguments on that point must be rejected. Accordingly, it is necessary to uphold the Opposition Division’s findings of identity and similarity as confirmed by the Board of Appeal.

*The element common to the marks at issue*

36      Having identified the relevant public and compared the goods concerned, it is appropriate to compare the signs appearing in the marks at issue.

37      According to the case-law, two marks may be regarded as similar when, from the point of view of the relevant public, they are at least partially identical as regards one or more relevant aspects (judgment of 8 September 2010, *Quinta do Portal* v *OHIM — Vallegre (PORTO ALEGRE)*, T‐369/09, not published, EU:T:2010:362, paragraph 21).

38      It is common ground between the parties that the signs at issue share a common feature, namely the presence in both marks of the element ‘joy’.

*The distinctiveness of the common element*

39      According to the contested decision, that element, in the earlier mark, has distinctive character which justifies the registration of that mark. In the case of that element, its inherent distinctive character is normal for a significant part of the relevant public. It is less than normal for the part of the relevant public that perceives the word ‘joy’ as having meaning.

40      That analysis is disputed by the applicant, which maintains that, in the presence of the earlier mark, the relevant public pays limited attention to the element ‘joy’ considered on its own. In the applicant’s view, consumers’ attention is rather directed at the entirety of the elements contained in that mark, namely ‘joy sportswear’.

41      In the applicant’s view, the limited attention paid by the relevant public to the word ‘joy’ derives from the generic nature of that word. It is a commonly used word in everyday speech, in which it corresponds to the idea of ‘happiness’.

42      Moreover, the word ‘joy’ is used in 59 trade marks and applications for EU trade marks which relate to goods in class 25. That everyday use in the specific context of marks applied to the goods concerned shows that that element has no distinctive character in respect of clothing and headgear.

43      It follows, for the applicant, that, since it is unremarkable, the word element ‘joy’, is not capable of significantly distinguishing the earlier mark and that, consequently, the presence of that word in the mark applied for cannot be the source of confusion between them.

44      In that regard, it should be noted that, contrary to the applicant’s claim, the presence of the element ‘joy’ in other marks, in the field concerned, is not sufficient to establish that that element has become weakly distinctive (see judgment of 16 September 2009, *Hipp & Co* v *OHIM-Laboratorios Ordesa (Bebimil)*, T‐221/06, not published, EU:T:2009:330, paragraph 59 and the case-law cited).

45      Moreover, it is necessary to take into account that, as indicated by the Board of Appeal, the English word ‘joy’ is not necessarily understood by average German consumers.

46      Finally, it is not certain that, in the event that they know English, German consumers will associate the word ‘joy’ with the idea of happiness. Indeed, a large number of marks used in respect of the goods concerned contain first names. In that context, it is probable, as the Board of Appeal noted, that an association will be made, by those consumers, with the female first name Joy.

47      For those reasons, the applicant’s arguments as regards the weak distinctive character of the word element ‘joy’ should be rejected and the findings of the Board of Appeal on that point upheld.

*The dominance of the common element*

48      The applicant claims that, contrary to the contested decision, the word element ‘joy’ of the earlier mark is not dominant.

49      In that regard, it should be noted that the earlier mark is made up of the combination of two elements, namely the words ‘joy’ and ‘sportswear’. In that combination, the first word appears in bold, italic letters with a white border. It occupies the greater part of the space. The second word appears at the bottom of the sign. It appears in a standard font with no particular figurative element. It is smaller in size.

50      On account of those findings, it should be concluded that the element ‘sportswear’ occupies a secondary position in the combination. Accordingly, it catches the eye to a lesser extent. In that context, it is unlikely that the element ‘sportswear’ will attract the attention of the relevant public and be remembered.

51      As regards those elements, it must be noted, as the Board of Appeal found, that the word ‘joy’ is likely to be perceived by the consumer, in the earlier mark, as a sign indicating the commercial origin of the goods covered and accordingly is likely to play a dominant role in the process whereby the sign is remembered by the relevant public.

*Visual comparison of the marks at issue*

52      The parties agree that the marks in question are visually different. As regards content, the mark applied for includes the separate letter ‘j’ and the ampersand ‘&’, which are not included in the earlier mark. The earlier mark contains the specific element ‘sportswear’. The beginning and end of the marks at issue are different.

53      As regards the structure and length of the signs, the earlier mark is made up of two words and thirteen characters, whereas the mark applied for is made up of three words and five characters.

54      The applicant submits that, contrary to the view expressed by the Board of Appeal, those visual differences are significant and confer distinctiveness on the mark applied for which is not offset by the presence of an identical word in the two marks at issue.

55      In that regard, it should be noted that the examination of potential similarity of marks must take into account the overall impression they produce (judgment of 12 June 2007, *OHIM* v *Shaker*, C‐334/05 P, EU:C:2007:333, paragraph 35 and the case-law cited).

56      As regards that point, the Board of Appeal found that the word element ‘joy’ dominated the overall visual impression in respect of the earlier mark and appeared in full in the mark applied for.

57      It also took the view that, in the mark applied for, the elements ‘j’ and ‘&’ were not capable of holding the relevant public’s attention. That factor highlights the word element ‘joy’, which is the element common to both marks.

58      Moreover, the Board of Appeal observed that, in the earlier mark, the second element (‘sportswear’) and the figurative elements were unremarkable. That factor also serves to highlight the word ‘joy’ which is, precisely, the element common to both marks.

59      Those findings of the Board of Appeal correspond to the characteristics of the signs at issue and it must be confirmed that they are well founded.

60      The conclusion based on those findings is that the element which appears centrally in the two marks is common to both. By contrast, the elements which are different play a subsidiary role in the relevant public’s perception. It follows that, as the Board of Appeal noted, the two marks have an average degree of visual similarity, the point that they have in common not being outweighed by sufficient differences.

61      The applicant, however, claims that EUIPO has concluded, in earlier decisions, that there was no visual similarity between the marks, despite the presence of a common element.

62      In that regard, it should be noted that the lawfulness of decisions taken by that body is assessed on the basis of Regulation No 207/2009, and not on the basis of decisions that it may have adopted earlier in other cases, since each case must be assessed specifically on the basis of its own facts (judgment of 15 September 2005, *BioID* v *OHIM*, C‐37/03 P, EU:C:2005:547, paragraph 47; order of 13 February 2008, *Indorata-Serviços e Gestão* v *OHIM*, C‐212/07 P, not published, EU:C:2008:83, paragraphs 43 and 44; and judgment of 24 November 2005, *Sadas* v *OHIM — LTJ Diffusion (ARTHUR ET FELICIE)*, T‐346/04, EU:T:2005:420, paragraph 71).

*The phonetic comparison of the marks at issue*

63      In disputing the contested decision on that point, the applicant submits that, when pronounced, the signs at issue raise, in the resulting phonetic impressions, differences which prevent any confusion between the marks concerned.

64      In support of its view, the applicant submits that the marks at issue include two different syllables and have only one syllable in common. The latter syllable, moreover, is not phonetically dominant.

65      The applicant claims that the mark applied for furthermore includes a double play on words which confers distinctive character on it as regards pronunciation. On the one hand, the sound ‘jay’ (for the letter ‘j’) is associated with the word ‘joy’ to designate two first names of young and trendy consumers. On the other hand, the overall phonetic impression of those sounds corresponds to the word ‘enjoy’ which is itself recognised as a set of sounds by consumers.

66      Those phonetic characteristics are very different from those associated with the earlier mark, which the average consumer pronounces as a whole without stopping specifically at the word ‘joy’.

67      In order to take a view on those arguments, it should be noted that, in a composite mark, certain elements may attract the consumer’s attention, with the result that, when saying the name of the mark, the consumer will pronounce those elements and leave out others.

68      The visual impression created by the specific graphic features of the word elements is therefore liable to influence the phonetic perception of a composite sign (see judgment of 12 July 2011, *Aldi Einkauf* v *OHIM — Illinois Tools Works (TOP CRAFT)*, T‐374/08, not published, EU:T:2011:346, paragraph 56 and the case-law cited).

69      In the present case, it should be noted that the phonetic difference between the two marks in question arises from the pronunciation of the separate letter ‘j’ and the ampersand ‘&’ at the start of the mark applied for and the absence of the word ‘sportswear’ at the end of the earlier mark.

70      In the light of its descriptive character, its size, and position in the earlier mark, it is unlikely that the word element ‘sportswear’ in the earlier mark will hold the attention of the relevant public and be pronounced by the relevant consumers when they wish to refer to the earlier mark.

71      Moreover, those differences cannot conceal the fact that the two marks share a common element which has been established as dominant, namely the word ‘joy’. As the Board of Appeal noted, that word holds the attention, on a phonetic level, when the marks are pronounced.

72      It follows from those findings that the pronunciation of the word ‘joy’ confers a degree of phonetic similarity on the two marks, although it cannot be said that they are perfectly identical in that respect.

73      It follows that the Board of Appeal did not err in taking the view that there is an average degree of phonetic similarity between the two signs at issue.

*The conceptual comparison of the marks at issue*

74      For the applicant, the earlier mark is perceived as designating sports clothes that the average consumer would be happy to wear. The applicant claims that that perception arises from the use, in that mark, of a generic term highlighting the idea of happiness (‘joy’) and its association with the word ‘sportswear’ which describes sports clothing.

75      The applicant submits that the mark applied for gives rise to another perception by alluding to a young couple enjoying life. That allusion is achieved through the association made in the mark applied for with the male first name ‘Jay’ and the female first name ‘Joy’. In combination, those first names bring to mind the English verb ‘enjoy’ which is an invitation to make the most of life.

76      The applicant claims that the perception thus created by the mark applied for attracts the consumer, specifically, to the goods marketed by the applicant — goods with style, in fashion and with a trendy, colourful and varied design.

77      According to the findings of the Board of Appeal, the relevant public is made up of the average German public and the level of attention paid to the goods in question is no higher than average.

78      In that context, it appears doubtful, as the Board of Appeal stated, that a significant part of the relevant public might understand the dual component which, in the applicant’s view, is inherent, on a conceptual level, in the mark applied for — even with regard to consumers who understand English.

79      Accordingly, it is unlikely, among the German public, that the average consumer who pays an average level of attention to the goods concerned would attribute significance, in the mark applied for, to a word other than ‘joy’, the common element of the marks at issue.

80      As regards the earlier mark, it is unlikely that the relevant public, defined in that manner, would pay specific conceptual attention to the word ‘sportswear’, supposing that it understands it, by considering that the clothes sold under that mark are exclusively intended for sporting use.

81      Under those conditions, it is unlikely that the actual visual and phonetic similarity between the two marks can be offset, even partially, by conceptual differences, if any, between the marks at issue.

*The likelihood of confusion*

82      A global assessment of the likelihood of confusion implies some interdependence between the factors taken into account and, in particular, between the similarity of the trade marks and that of the goods or services covered. Accordingly, a low degree of similarity between those goods or services may be offset by a high degree of similarity between the marks, and vice versa (judgment of 29 September 1998, *Canon*, C-39/97, EU:C:1998:442; see, also, judgment of 14 December 2006, *Mast-Jägermeister* v *OHIM* — *Licorera Zacapaneca (VENADO with frame and others)*, T‐81/03, T‐82/03 and T‐103/03, EU:T:2006:397, paragraph 74 and the case-law cited).

83      The Board of Appeal considered in essence that, in so far as the earlier mark has average distinctive character, the goods are identical or similar (to varying degrees) and the marks at issue are similar overall, a significant part of the relevant public could be misled into thinking, wrongly, that the goods in question bearing the mark applied for and the earlier mark come from the same undertaking or from undertakings that are economically linked.

*The inherent distinctiveness of the earlier mark*

84      The applicant claims that the intervener should have established the inherent distinctiveness of the earlier mark in order for the application for registration concerning the mark applied for to be refused.

85      In that regard, it should be noted that, according to the case-law, EUIPO is required to examine the inherent distinctiveness of an earlier mark when it examines an opposition filed against an application for registration of a new mark. Accordingly, since the assessment of inherent distinctiveness does not presuppose any matter of fact which is up to the parties to establish, EUIPO must assess its existence in the light of the earlier mark on which the opposition is based, without the parties having to put forward grounds or arguments seeking to establish that character (judgment of 1 February 2005, *SPAG* v *OHIM* — *Dann and Backer (HOOLIGAN)*, T‐57/03, EU:T:2005:29, paragraph 32).

86      The intervener was not therefore required to provide evidence of the inherent distinctiveness of the earlier mark, contrary to the applicant’s claim.

87      The applicant also maintains that, in its view, that distinctiveness was not established to the requisite legal standard by the Opposition Division and then by the Board of Appeal.

88      In that regard, it suffices to note that, in the present case, the Board of Appeal examined the inherent distinctiveness of the earlier mark. In that context, it considered that the earlier mark as a whole had an average degree of distinctiveness in respect of all the goods in the relevant territory.

89      More particularly, the Board of Appeal considered that the dominant element ‘joy’ had no semantic meaning for a significant part of the relevant public and concluded that the word ‘joy’ had an average degree of distinctiveness for that significant part of the relevant public.

90      The Board of Appeal also considered that the English word ‘sportswear’ would be understood as referring to ‘sporty daywear, casual wear’ and that it has no distinctive character or, at most, rather weak distinctive character.

91      In the light of the foregoing, the Board of Appeal therefore established to the requisite legal standard that the earlier mark as a whole had an average degree of distinctiveness for all goods in the relevant territory.

92      Moreover, even supposing that the earlier mark has merely weak distinctive character, the Board of Appeal was fully entitled to conclude, in paragraph 70 of the contested decision, that a likelihood of confusion between the marks at issue could not be ruled out on the part of the relevant public in the light of the identical nature of the goods covered by the earlier mark and the mark applied for and the elements of similarity between the signs at issue (see judgment of 13 December 2007, *Xentral* v *OHIM — Pages jaunes (PAGESJAUNES.COM)*, T‐134/06, EU:T:2007:387, paragraph 70 and the case-law cited).

*The reputation of the earlier trade mark*

93      The applicant also maintains that the mark applied for has a reputation in a significant part of the European Union and that that reputation suffices to distinguish it from the earlier mark.

94      In that regard, it should be noted that reputation is relevant in assessing whether there is a likelihood of confusion as regards the earlier mark, but that that is not the case in respect of the assessment of the distinctiveness of the mark applied for.

95      As stated in the Court’s case-law, the highly distinctive character of a sign is relevant only in respect of the earlier mark and not the later mark (judgments of 29 September 1998, *Canon*, C‐39/97, EU:C:1998:442, paragraph 24; of 3 September 2009, *Aceites del Sur-Coosur* v *Koipe and OHIM*, C‐498/07 P, EU:C:2009:503, paragraph 84, and of 28 June 2012, *I Marchi Italiani and Basile* v *OHIM — Osra (B. Antonio Basile 1952)*, T‐133/09, EU:T:2012:327, paragraph 18).

*Conclusion*

96      On the basis of those considerations, it must be concluded that the Board of Appeal did not err in finding that there was a likelihood of confusion between the signs at issue in so far as they concern the goods in Class 18 and Class 25 covered by the earlier mark and the mark applied for, to the extent that they fall within the scope of the appeal before the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO.

97      The identity or similarity of the goods covered by the marks at issue, the similarity of the signs and the average degree of attention of the relevant public, considered cumulatively, are sufficient to conclude that there is a likelihood of confusion.

98      For those reasons, the action must be dismissed in its entirety.

**Costs**

99      Under Article 134(1) of the Rules of Procedure, the unsuccessful party is to be ordered to pay the costs if they have been applied for in the successful party’s pleadings.

100    Since the applicant has been unsuccessful, it must be ordered to pay the costs incurred in the present proceedings before the Court, in accordance with the forms of order sought by EUIPO and the intervener. There is therefore no need to rule on the different interpretations of the parties concerning the scope of the applicant’s head of claim relating to costs.

On those grounds,

THE GENERAL COURT (First Chamber)

hereby:

1.      Dismisses the action;

2.      **Orders J & Joy SA to pay the costs.**

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Pelikánová | Nihoul | Svenningsen |

Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 29 March 2017.

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| E. Coulon | | I. Pelikánová |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Registrar | | President |

---

[\*](#Footref*)      Language of the case: English.