Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 28 March 2019 –  
Zakłady Chemiczne “Siarkopol” Tarnobrzeg v EUIPO — EuroChem Agro (Unifoska)

(Case T‑259/18)

(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU word mark Unifoska — Earlier EU word mark NITROFOSKA — 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 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 17, 18, 34) |

| 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 — Earlier trade mark constituted by an EU trade mark — Refusal to register on a relative ground for refusal even though limited to part of the Union  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 19) |

| 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  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 20) |

| 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 — Word marks Unifoska and NITROFOSKA  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see paras 21, 28, 32, 33, 37-44) |

| 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  (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))  (see para. 24) |

| 6. | Judicial proceedings — Application initiating proceedings — Formal requirements — Brief summary of the pleas in law on which the application is based — Pleas in law not set out in the application — General reference to documents annexed to the application — Inadmissibility  (Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 21, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 177(1)(d))  (see para. 45) |

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 7 February 2018 (Case R 1503/2017-5), relating to opposition proceedings between EuroChem Agro and Zakłady Chemiczne “Siarkopol” Tarnobrzeg.

Operative part

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |

| 2. | Orders Zakłady Chemiczne “Siarkopol” Tarnobrzeg sp. z o.o. to pay the costs. |

[Top](#document1)