Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 14 June 2016 — Staatliche Porzellan-Manufaktur Meissen v EUIPO — Meissen Keramik (MEISSEN)

(Case T‑789/14)

‛EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark MEISSEN — Earlier EU and national word and figurative marks MEISSEN, MEISSENER PORZELLAN, HAUS MEISSEN, Meissen and Meissener Porzellan — Relative grounds for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Distinctive character and reputation of the earlier marks — Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 — Genuine use of the earlier marks — Article 42(2) and (3) of Regulation No 207/2009 — Article 15(1) of Regulation No 207/2009’

1. EU trade mark — Appeals procedure — Action before the EU judicature — Jurisdiction of the General Court — Review of the lawfulness of decisions of the Boards of Appeal — Re-examination of the facts in the light of evidence not previously submitted before EUIPO bodies — Not included (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 65(2)) (see para. 16)

2. EU trade mark — Observations of third parties and opposition — Examination of the opposition — Proof of use of the earlier mark — Genuine use — Definition — Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 42(2) and (3)) (see paras 24, 25)

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 — High distinctiveness of the earlier mark — Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 36, 37, 48, 95, 99, 102)

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. 38)

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 — Figurative mark MEISSEN — Word and figurative marks MEISSEN, MEISSENER PORZELLAN, HAUS MEISSEN, Meissen and Meissener Porzellan (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 44, 45, 66, 67, 94, 111, 138)

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. 46)

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 (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 69-71, 91)

8. 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 enjoying a reputation — Protection of well-known earlier mark extended to dissimilar goods or services — Conditions — Taking unfair advantage of the distinctive character or repute of the earlier mark — Concept (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(5)) (see paras 117, 118, 127)

9. 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 enjoying a reputation — Protection of well-known earlier mark extended to dissimilar goods or services — Proof to be adduced by proprietor — Future, non-hypothetical risk of unfair advantage or damage (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(5)) (see para. 128)

10. 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 enjoying a reputation — Protection of well-known earlier mark extended to dissimilar goods or services — Condition — Link between the marks — Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(5)) (see para. 133)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 September 2014 (Joined Cases R 1182/2013-4 and R 1245/2013-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Staatliche Porzellan-Manufaktur Meissen and Meissen Keramik.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;