Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2018:564
Date: 2018-09-19
Language of the case: German
Court formation: Sixth Chamber
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
Procedure: Action for annulment - successful
Origin: Germany

Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 19 September 2018 – Eddy’s Snack Company v EUIPO — Chocoladefabriken Lindt & Sprüngli (Eddy’s Snackcompany) (Case T‑652/17) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark Eddy’s Snackcompany — Earlier national word mark TEDDY — Relative ground for refusal — Principle of ne ultra petita — Article 76(1) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 95(1) of Regulation (EU) No 2017/1001) — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) 1. EU trade mark — Appeals procedure — Appeal against a decision of the Opposition Division of EUIPO — Decision of the Board of Appeal going beyond the subject-matter of the opposition — Unlawfulness (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Arts 42(5), first sentence, 64(1), first sentence, and 76(1)) (see para. 20) 2. EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU 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 27, 62, 63) 3. EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU 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 — Assessment of the likelihood of confusion — Determination of the relevant public — Attention level of the public (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see para. 29) 4. EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU 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 between the goods or services in question — Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see para. 32) 5. EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU 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 38, 39) 6. EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU 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 Eddy’s Snackcompany and TEDDY (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 43, 65, 66) Re: Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 July 2017 (Case R 1999/2016-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Chocoladefabriken Lindt & Sprüngli and Eddy’s Snack Company. Operative part The Court: 1. Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 11 July 2017 (Case R 1999/2016-4); 2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Eddy’s Snack Company GmbH in the proceedings before the General Court. 2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Eddy’s Snack Company GmbH in the proceedings before the General Court.