Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 12 December 2018 –  
Vitromed v EUIPO — Vitromed Healthcare (VITROMED Germany)

(Case T‑821/17)

(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark VITROMED Germany — Earlier EU word mark Vitromed — 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 — Appeals procedure — Action before the EU judicature — Jurisdiction of the General Court — Review of the lawfulness of decisions of the Boards of Appeal — Account taken by the General Court of matters of law and fact not previously raised before the departments of EUIPO — Not included  (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 2017/1001, Art. 72(2))  (see para. 18) |

| 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  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 24, 90) |

| 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 — Assessment of the likelihood of confusion — Determination of the relevant public — Attention level of the public  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 26) |

| 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 paras 27, 32, 40) |

| 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 — Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark — Figurative mark VITROMED Germany and word mark Vitromed  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 30, 42, 49, 69, 94-97) |

| 6. | EU trade mark — Appeals procedure — Appeal brought against a decision by a department of EUIPO — Examination by the Board of Appeal — Scope  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 64(1))  (see para. 36) |

| 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 between the goods or services in question — Complementary nature of the goods or services  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 47) |

| 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  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 51, 53, 55, 75) |

| 9. | 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  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 52) |

| 10. | 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  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 54) |

| 11. | 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. 93) |

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 September 2017 (Case R 2402/2016-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Vitromed Healthcare and Vitromed.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Vitromed GmbH to pay the costs. |

[Top](#document1)