Order — ECLI:EU:T:2017:41
Date: 2017-01-26
Language of the case: German
Court formation: Sixth Chamber
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property;Procedural provisions
Procedure: Action for annulment;Application as to costs
Origin: Germany

Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 26 November 2015 — Nürburgring v OHIM — Biedermann (Nordschleife) (Case T‑181/14) Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark Nordschleife — Earlier Community word mark Management by Nordschleife — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 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 registered for identical or similar goods or services — Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark — Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 17, 71) 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 registered for identical or similar goods or services — Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark — Word marks Nordschleife and Management by Nordschleife (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 19-21, 48, 76, 77) 3. 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 registered for identical or similar goods or services — Similarity of the marks concerned — Criteria for assessment — Composite mark (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 23-26) 4. Community trade mark — Decisions of the Office — Principle of equal treatment — Principle of sound administration — OHIM’s previous decision-making practice — Principle of legality — Need for a strict and complete examination in each particular case (see paras 44-46) Re: ACTION brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 20 January 2014 (Case R 163/2013-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Mr Lutz Biedermann and Nürburgring GmbH. Operative part The Court: 1. Dismisses the action; 2. Orders Nürburgring GmbH to pay the costs.