Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 5 March 2014 — HP Health Clubs Iberia v OHIM — Shiseido (ZENSATIONS)
(Case T‑416/12)
Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community figurative mark ZENSATIONS — Earlier Community word mark ZEN — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Admissibility of the applicant’s form of order — Article 46 of the Rules of Procedure — Obligation to state reasons — First sentence of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 — Examination of the facts by the Office of its own motion — Article 76(1) of Regulation No 207/2009
1.                     Community trade mark — Appeals procedure — Action before the EU judicature — Application initiating proceedings — Reply of the intervener — Formal requirements — Brief summary of the pleas in law on which the application is based — Pleas in law not put forward in the application and the response — General reference to other documents — Inadmissibility (Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Arts 46(1)(b), and 135(1), second para.) (see paras 18-20)
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 — Weak distinctive character of the earlier mark — Relevance (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see para. 29)
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 — Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 41, 42, 79)
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 ZENSATIONS and word mark ZEN (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 43, 44-47, 80-84)
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. 76) (see para. 48)
Re:
ACTION brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 June 2012 (Case R 2212/2010‑1) relating to opposition proceedings between Shiseido Company Ltd and HP Health Clubs Iberia S.A.
Operative part
The Court:
1.
Dismisses the action;
2.
Dismisses the heads of claims of Shiseido Company Ltd other than that essentially seeking the dismissal of the action as manifestly inadmissible;
3.
Orders HP Health Clubs Iberia S.A. to bear its own costs and those incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM);
4.
Orders Shiseido Company Ltd to bear its own costs.