Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 1 February 2017 — Gómez Echevarría v EUIPO — M and M Direct (wax by Yuli’s)

(Case T‑19/15)

(EU trade mark — Invalidity proceedings — EU figurative mark wax by Yuli’s — Earlier EU word mark MADWAX and earlier national figurative mark wax — Article 53(1)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 — Extent of the examination carried out by the Board of Appeal — Article 64(1) of Regulation No 207/2009 — Rights of the defence — Article 41(2)(a) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights — Abuse of rights — Costs of representation before EUIPO — Article 85(1) of Regulation No 207/2009)

1. EU trade mark — Appeals procedure — Appeal brought against a decision of a unit of the Office ruling at first instance and referred to the Board of Appeal — Functional continuity between those two bodies — Examination of the appeal by the Board of Appeal — Scope (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 64(1)) (see paras 17-19)

2. EU trade mark — Appeals procedure — Decision on the appeal — Observance of the rights of the defence — Scope of the principle (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 75) (see paras 26, 27)

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 (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 42, 96)

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 — 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 para. 46)

5. EU trade mark — Surrender, revocation and invalidity — Relative grounds for invalidity — Existence of an identical or similar earlier mark registered for identical or similar goods or services — Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark — Figurative marks wax by Yuli’s and wax (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Arts 8(1)(b), and 53(1)(a)) (see paras 48, 52, 54, 95, 100)

6. 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 para. 53)

7. 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 — Determination of dominant component(s) (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 61-64, 75, 93)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 November 2014 (Case R 951/2014-1) relating to invalidity proceedings between M and M Direct and Ms Gómez Echevarría.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;