Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2016:99
Date: 2016-02-25
Language of the case: Polish
Court formation: Seventh Chamber
Subject matter: Trade marks;Intellectual, industrial and commercial property
Procedure: Action for annulment - successful
Origin: Germany

Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 25 February 2016 — Puma v OHIM — Sinda Poland (Representation of an animal) (Case T‑692/14) Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for figurative mark representing an animal — Earlier international figurative marks representing a puma — Relative ground for refusal — Similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 1. Community trade mark — Appeals procedure — Action before the EU judicature — Legality of the decision of a Board of Appeal adjudicating in opposition proceedings — Challenged by the adducing of new facts — Not permissible — Account taken, for the purposes of interpreting EU law, of EU national or international case-law not cited before the OHIM bodies — Lawfulness (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 65) (see para. 14) 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 — Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 17, 18) 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 — 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 paras 19, 24) 4. 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 — Figurative mark representing an animal and figurative marks representing a puma (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 25, 33-36) 5. 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 (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 27, 32) Re: ACTION brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 14 July 2014 (Case R 2214/2013-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Puma SE and Sinda Poland Corporation sp. z o.o. Operative part The Court: 1. Annuls the decision of the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 14 July 2014 (Case R 2214/2013-5); 2. Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay half of the costs incurred by Puma SE, including those necessarily incurred by Puma SE for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM; 3. Orders Sinda Poland Corporation sp. z o.o. to bear its own costs and to pay half of the costs incurred by Puma SE, including those necessarily incurred by Puma SE for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM.