Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2007:213
Date: 2007-07-11
Language of the case: Italian
Court formation: Second Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
Concepts: Figurative marks applied for;Earlier trade mark which has a reputation
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded
Origin: Germany

Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) of 11 July 2007 – Mülhens v OHIM – Cara (TOSKA LEATHER) (Case T-28/04) Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for figurative Community trade mark TOSKA LEATHER – Earlier national word mark TOSCA – Relative grounds for refusal – Well-known trade mark within the meaning of Article 6 bis of the Paris Convention – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 – Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 1. Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark well known in a Member State (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 31-32) 2. Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark enjoying a reputation (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(5)) (see paras 57-59) Re: ACTION brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 20 November 2003 (Case R 10/2003-1) concerning opposition proceedings between Mülhens GmbH & Co. KG and Mirco Cara. Information relating to the case Applicant for the Community trade mark: Mirco Cara Community trade mark sought: Figurative mark TOSKA LEATHER for goods in Classes 16, 18 and 25 – Application No 1079888 Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Mülhens GmbH & Co. KG Mark or sign cited in opposition: German word mark TOSCA for perfumery products Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition allowed for products in Class 25 and dismissed as to the remainder Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed Operative part The Court: 1. Dismisses the action; 2. Orders Mülhens GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.