Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 20 November 2019 –  
Werner v EUIPO — Merck (fLORAMED)

(Case T‑695/18)

(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark fLORAMED — Earlier EU word mark MEDIFLOR — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

| 1. | EU trade mark — Appeals procedure — Action before the EU judicature — Condition of admissibility — Grounds of appeal directed only against decisions of the Boards of Appeal  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 72(1))  (see para. 16) |

| 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 — Criteria for assessment  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 22, 23, 51) |

| 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 between the goods or services in question — Criteria for assessment  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 24) |

| 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 — Figurative mark fLORAMED and word mark MEDIFLOR  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 36, 46, 49, 52) |

| 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  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 42) |

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 17 September 2018 (Case R 197/2018-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Merck and Mr Werner.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | dismisses the action; |

| 2. | orders Mr Stefan Werner to pay the costs. |

[Top](#document1)