Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 7 June 2023 –  
Vallegre v EUIPO – Joseph Phelps Vineyards (PORTO INSÍGNIA)

(Case T‑33/22) (
[1](#t-ECR_62022TJ0033_INF_EN_01-E0001)
)

(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the EU word mark PORTO INSÍGNIA – Earlier EU word mark INSIGNIA – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now 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 identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of 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 paragraphs 19, 69, 74, 80) |

| 2. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of 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 paragraphs 24, 25) |

| 3. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Word marks PORTO INSÍGNIA et INSIGNIA  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paragraphs 26, 31, 44, 50, 59, 64, 65, 70, 73, 79, 81) |

| 4. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Similarity of the marks concerned – Criteria for assessment – Wine sector  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paragraphs 32, 48, 49, 55-57, 63) |

| 5. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Similarity of the marks concerned – Assessment of the distinctive character of an element of which a trade mark is composed  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paragraphs 34, 45) |

| 6. | EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Similarity of the marks concerned – Elements of a trade mark having a descriptive character – Criteria for assessment  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paragraphs 35, 36) |

| 7. | EU trade mark – Appeals procedure – Action before the EU judicature – Pleas in law  (Art. 263 TFEU; Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 47)  (see paragraph 42) |

| 8. | EU trade mark – Decisions of EUIPO – Legality – Examination by the EU judicature – Criteria  (Council Regulation No 207/2009)  (see paragraph 46) |

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Vallegre, Vinhos do Porto, SA to pay the costs. |

---

(
[1](#c-ECR_62022TJ0033_INF_EN_01-E0001)
) [OJ C 119, 14.3.2022](./../../../legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=OJ:C:2022:119:TOC).

[Top](#document1)