Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 26 September 2012 — Serrano Aranda v OHIM — Burg Groep (LE LANCIER)

(Case T-265/09)

‛Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark LE LANCIER — Earlier national word and figurative marks EL LANCERO — Relative grounds for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Opposition dismissed’

1. 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 — Criteria (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 15-16, 43, 74-75)

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 — Word mark LE LANCIER — Word and figurative marks EL LANCERO (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 18, 70, 76)

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 — Similarity between the goods or services in question — Criteria for assessment — Complementary nature of the goods (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 22, 34)

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 — Similarity of the marks concerned — Criteria for assessment — Complex mark (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 51-52)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 27 March 2009 (Case R 366/2008-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Mr Enrique Serrano Aranda and Burg Groep BV.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Mr Enrique Serrano Aranda to pay the costs.

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 26 September 2012 — Serrano Aranda v OHIM — Burg Groep (LE LANCIER)

(Case T-265/09)

‛Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark LE LANCIER — Earlier national word and figurative marks EL LANCERO — Relative grounds for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Opposition dismissed’

1. 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 — Criteria (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 15-16, 43, 74-75)

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 — Word mark LE LANCIER — Word and figurative marks EL LANCERO (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 18, 70, 76)

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 — Similarity between the goods or services in question — Criteria for assessment — Complementary nature of the goods (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 22, 34)

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 — Similarity of the marks concerned — Criteria for assessment — Complex mark (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 51-52)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 27 March 2009 (Case R 366/2008-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Mr Enrique Serrano Aranda and Burg Groep BV.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;