62019TJ0821_INF
Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 10 February 2021 –Herlyn and Beck v EUIPO – Brillux (B.home)
(Case T‑821/19)
(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the EU word mark B.home – Earlier international word mark B-Wohnen – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))
1.
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 28-30, 79, 80)
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 – Word marks B.home and B-Wohnen
(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paras 32, 33, 44, 50, 59, 60, 69, 73, 83-85)
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 – Similarity between the goods or services in question – Criteria for assessment
(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paras 37, 38)
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 of the marks concerned – Criteria for assessment
(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paras 45, 46)
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 – Conceptual similarity between the marks composed of verbal elements in different languages – Criteria for assessment
(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see para. 64)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 September 2019 (Case R 373/2019-5), concerning opposition proceedings between, on the one hand, Brillux and, on the other hand, Ms Herlyn and Mr Beck.
Operative part
The Court:
1.
Dismisses the action;
2.
Orders Ms Sonja Herlyn and Mr Christian Beck to pay the costs.