Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2008:319
Date: 2008-09-09
Language of the case: English
Court formation: Fourth Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
Concepts: Word marks applied for
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded
Origin: United Kingdom

Summary of the Judgment 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 (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) There is a likelihood of confusion within the meaning of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94 on the Community trade mark for the relevant public – composed, on the one hand, of second-hand car dealers, garage owners and mechanics and, on the other hand, of average consumers, who will probably be assisted by a mechanic or other skilled professional when changing or repairing anything related to a vehicle seat – between the word sign MAGIC SEAT, for which registration as a Community trade mark is sought in respect of ‘vehicle seats and vehicle seat mechanisms and parts and fittings and accessories for these goods’ in Class 12 under the Nice Agreement, and the figurative mark SEAT, registered earlier in Spain in respect of ‘land vehicles, coupling and transmission components as well as other components and spare parts for land vehicles not belonging to other classes; apparatus for locomotion by land, air or water’ in the same class of the Nice Agreement. The goods covered by the two marks are identical and the two marks are similar overall. Moreover, the earlier trade mark has a high distinctive character in Spain on account of its reputation, with the result that it enjoys a greater protection than those marks with a less distinctive character. It follows that there is a likelihood that the relevant public might believe that the goods in question come from the same undertaking or, as the case may be, from economically-linked undertakings. (see paras 21, 55-57)