62018TJ0628_INF
Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 17 October 2019 –E.I. Papadopoulos v EUIPO — Europastry (fripan VIENNOISERIE CAPRICE Pur Beurre)
(Case T‑628/18)
(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for European Union figurative mark fripan VIENNOISERIE CAPRICE Pur Beurre — Earlier EU figurative mark Caprice — 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 23, 50)
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 — Similarity of the marks concerned — Criteria for assessment — Composite mark
(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paras 29-32)
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 — Criteria for assessment — Early mark occupying a distinctive independent position in the trade mark sought
(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paras 33-35)
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 — Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark — Figurative marks fripan VIENNOISERIE CAPRICE Pur Beurre and Caprice
(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paras 36, 44, 52, 76)
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 — Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark — High distinctiveness of the earlier mark — Criteria for assessment
(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))
(see paras 62, 63)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 August 2018 (Case R 493/2018-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Viomichania mpiskoton kai eidon diatrofis E.I. Papadopoulos and Europastry.
Operative part
The Court:
1.
Dismisses the action;
2.
Orders Viomichania mpiskoton kai eidon diatrofis E.I. Papadopoulos SA to pay the costs.