Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 19 October 2017 —  
Hernández Zamora v EUIPO

(Case C‑224/17 P)

(Appeal — Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court — EU trade mark — Application for registration of the word mark Paloma — Earlier figurative mark Paloma — Opposition proceedings — Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Article 8(1)(b) — Likelihood of confusion — Principle of interdependence — Similarity of the marks — Absence)

| 1. | Appeal—Grounds—Mere repetition of the pleas and arguments put forward before the General Court—Error of law relied on not identified—Inadmissibility  (Art. 256 TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Arts 168(1)(d) and 169(2))  (see paras 5, 6) |

| 2. | Appeal—Grounds—Incorrect assessment of the facts and evidence—Inadmissibility—Review by the Court of the assessment of the facts and evidence—Possible only where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted  (Art. 256(1) TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.))  (see paras 5, 6) |

| 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—Criteria for assessment  (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 5, 6) |

Operative part

| 1. | The appeal is dismissed. |

| 2. | Hernández Zamora SA is ordered to bear its own costs. |

[Top](#document1)