CELEX: 62011TN0611
Language: en
Date: 2011-12-01 00:00:00
Title: Case T-611/11: Action brought on 1 December 2011 — Spa Monopole v OHIM — South Pacific Management (Manea Spa)

4.2.2012   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 32/34
            
         Action brought on 1 December 2011 — Spa Monopole v OHIM — South Pacific Management (Manea Spa)
   (Case T-611/11)
   2012/C 32/69
   Language in which the application was lodged: French
   
      Parties
   
   
      Applicant: Spa Monopole, compagnie fermière de Spa SA/NV (Spa, Belgium) (represented by: L. De Brouwer, E. Cornu and E. De Gryse, lawyers)
   
      Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)
   
      Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: South Pacific Management (Papeete, Polynesia)
   
      Form of order sought
   
   The applicant claims that the Court should:
   
               —
            
            
               Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 8 September 2011 in Joined Cases R 1776/2010-1 and 1886/2010-1;
            
         
               —
            
            
               Order the defendant to pay the costs.
            
         
      Pleas in law and main arguments
   
   
      Applicant for a Community trade mark: South Pacific Management.
   
      Community trade mark concerned: word mark ‘Manea Spa’ for goods and services in Classes 3, 24, 25, 43 and 44.
   
      Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: the applicant.
   
      Mark or sign cited in opposition: Benelux registrations of the word marks ‘SPA’ and ‘Les Thermes de Spa’ for goods and services in Classes 3, 32 and 42 (now Class 44).
   
      Decision of the Opposition Division: partial rejection of the opposition.
   
      Decision of the Board of Appeal: dismissal of the applicant’s appeal.
   
      Pleas in law: Breach of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 in the assessment of the similarity of the marks at issue and as regards the assessment of the importance of the distinctive character acquired by use of the mark ‘SPA’ and of the likelihood of confusion, as well as breach of Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009 as regards the assessment of the reputation of the marks ‘SPA’ and ‘Les Thermes de Spa’.