Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 7 November 2017 – Mundipharma v EUIPO – Multipharma (MULTIPHARMA)

(Case T-144/16)

(European Union trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU word mark MULTIPHARMA — Prior EU word mark MUNDIPHARMA — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — 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 18, 65) |

| 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–Assessment of the likelihood of confusion–Attention level of the public–Medicinal products  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 25-27) |

| 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–Word marks MULTIPHARMA and MUNDIPHARMA  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 28, 32, 64, 69, 70) |

| 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 between the goods or services in question–Criteria for assessment  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para 29) |

| 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  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 33, 34, 36) |

| 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–Similarity of the marks concerned–Assessment of the distinctiveness of an element composing a trade mark  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para 35) |

| 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  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para 54) |

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 January 2016 (Case R 2950/2014-1) concerning opposition proceedings between Mundipharma and Multipharma.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 22 January 2016 (Case R 2950/2014-1); |

| 2. | Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Mundipharma AG, including the costs necessarily incurred by Mundipharma for the purposes of the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO; |

| 3. | Orders Multipharma SA to bear its own costs. |

[Top](#document1)