Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2014:864
Date: 2014-10-08
Language of the case: English
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
Procedure: Action for annulment - successful
Origin: Germany

Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 8 October 2014 — Lidl Stiftung v OHIM — A Colmeia do Minho (FAIRGLOBE) (Case T‑300/12) Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community figurative mark FAIRGLOBE — Earlier national word marks GLOBO — Relative ground for refusal — No proof of genuine use of the earlier marks — Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Rule 22(3) and (4) of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 1. Community trade mark — Observations of third parties and opposition — Examination of the opposition — Proof of use of the earlier mark — Genuine use — Concept — Interpretation having regard to the rationale of Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009 (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 42(2) and (3)) (see para. 22) 2. Community trade mark — Observations of third parties and opposition — Examination of the opposition — Proof of use of the earlier mark — Genuine use — Concept — Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 42(2) and (3)) (see paras 24-28) 3. Community trade mark — Observations of third parties and opposition — Examination of the opposition — Proof of use of the earlier mark — Partial use — Effect — Concept of ‘part of goods or services’ concerned by registration (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 42(2) and (3)) (see para. 47) Re: ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 2 April 2012 (Case R 1981/2010-2) concerning opposition proceedings between A Colmeia do Minho Ldª and Lidl Stiftung & Co. KG. Operative part The Court: 1. Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 2 April 2012 (Case R 1981/2010-2), concerning opposition proceedings between A Colmeia do Minho Ldª and Lidl Stiftung & Co. KG, in that it found that genuine use of the earlier marks had been demonstrated to the requisite legal standard; 2. Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Lidl Stiftung & Co.