Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 19 June 2019 –  
Marriott Worldwide v EUIPO – AC Milan (AC MILAN)

(Case T-28/18)

(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — International registration designating the European Union — Figurative mark AC MILAN — Earlier EU word marks AC and AC HOTELS BY MARRIOTT and earlier EU figurative mark AC HOTELS MARRIOTT — Relative ground for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — No similarity between the signs — Lack of enhanced distinctiveness of the mark AC — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

| 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  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 16-18, 88, 103) |

| 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 – Similarity of the marks concerned – Criteria for assessment – Composite mark  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 27, 29, 32, 72, 98) |

| 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 – Similarity of the marks concerned – Assessment of the distinctiveness of an element composing a trade mark  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 28) |

| 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 – Similarity of the marks concerned – Elements of a trade mark having a descriptive character  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 30) |

| 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 the dominant elements  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 31) |

| 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 – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Figurative mark AC MILAN – AC HOTELS MARRIOTT Word marks AC and AC HOTELS BY MARRIOTT and figurative mark AC HOTELS MARRIOTT  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 57, 90, 92, 93, 102, 115-118) |

| 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 – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Similarity of the marks concerned – Whether conceptual differences may neutralise visual or aural similarities – Conditions  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 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 registered for identical or similar goods or services – Similarity of the marks concerned – Criteria for assessment – Composite mark – Element common to two marks having an independent distinctive role in the earlier mark  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 95-97) |

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 November 2017 (Case R 356/2017-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Marriott Worldwide and AC Milan.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Marriott Worldwide Corp. to pay the costs. |

[Top](#document1)