Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 15 December 2016 — Aldi v EUIPO — Miquel Alimentació Grup (Gourmet)

(Case T‑212/15)

(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark Gourmet — Earlier national word and figurative marks GOURMET and Gourmet — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

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 27, 28, 68)

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—Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark—Figurative mark Gourmet and word and figurative marks GOURMET and Gourmet (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 30-33, 70, 77)

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—Coexistence of earlier marks—Recognition of a certain degree of distinctiveness of a national mark (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b); European Parliament and Council Directive 2008/95, Art. 3(1)(b)) (see paras 36-38)

4. EU trade mark—Decisions of the Office—Legality—Examination by the EU judicature—Criteria (Council Regulation No 207/2009) (see para. 42)

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—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 48-50)

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 of the marks concerned—Visual similarity between a figurative mark and a word mark (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see para. 56)

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—Weak distinctive character of the dominant element (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see para. 60)

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 registered for identical or similar goods or services—Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark—Weak distinctive character of the earlier mark—Effect (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see para. 69)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 February 2015 (Case R 0314/2014-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Miquel Alimentació Grup and Aldi.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;