Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 26 July 2023 –  
Schneider v EUIPO – Frutaria Innovation (frutania)

(Case T‑109/22) (
[1](#t-ECR_62022TJ0109_INF_EN_01-E0001)
)

(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the EU figurative mark frutania – Earlier EU figurative mark Frutaria – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – 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  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paragraphs 20, 21, 59) |

| 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 – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Refusal to register where there is a relative ground for refusal, even if limited to part of the European Union  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paragraphs 22, 28) |

| 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 – Assessment of the likelihood of confusion – Determination of the relevant public – Level of attention of the public  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paragraph 24) |

| 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 between the goods or services in question – Criteria for assessment  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paragraphs 30, 31) |

| 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 between the marks concerned – Criteria for assessment – Composite mark – Assessment of the distinctive character of an element of a trade mark  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paragraphs 39-41, 45-47) |

| 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 – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Figurative marks frutania and Frutaria  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paragraphs 62, 63) |

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Mr Markus Schneider to pay the costs. |

---

(
[1](#c-ECR_62022TJ0109_INF_EN_01-E0001)
) [OJ C 158, 11.4.2022](./../../../legal-content/EN/AUTO/?uri=OJ:C:2022:158:TOC).

[Top](#document1)