This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62011CJ0306
Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 28 June 2012. # XXXLutz Marken GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM). # Appeals - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Figurative mark Linea Natura Natur hat immer Stil - Opposition by the proprietor of the Community figurative mark natura selection - Relative grounds for refusal - Likelihood of confusion. # Case C-306/11 P.
Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 28 June 2012.
XXXLutz Marken GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).
Appeals - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Figurative mark Linea Natura Natur hat immer Stil - Opposition by the proprietor of the Community figurative mark natura selection - Relative grounds for refusal - Likelihood of confusion.
Case C-306/11 P.
Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 28 June 2012.
XXXLutz Marken GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).
Appeals - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Figurative mark Linea Natura Natur hat immer Stil - Opposition by the proprietor of the Community figurative mark natura selection - Relative grounds for refusal - Likelihood of confusion.
Case C-306/11 P.
European Court Reports 2012 -00000
ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:C:2012:401
Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 28 June 2012 —
XXXLutz Marken v OHIM
(Case C-306/11 P)
Appeal — Community trade mark — Regulation (EC) No 40/94 — Figurative mark Linea Natura Natur hat immer Stil — Opposition by the proprietor of the Community figurative mark natura selection — Relative grounds for refusal — Likelihood of confusion
1. Community trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the Community 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 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 39-41)
2. Appeals — 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(1)) (see para. 50)
Re:
Appeal against the judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 24 March 2011 in Case T-54/09 | XXXLutz Marken | v | OHIM — Natura Selection (Linea Natura Natur hat immer Stil) | dismissing the action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 28 November 2008 (Case R 1787/2007-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Natura Selection, SL and XXXLutz Marken GmbH — Likelihood of confusion between the figurative signs ‘natura selection’ and ‘Linea Natura Natur hat immer Stil’ — Erroneous assessment of the similarity of those signs — Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94. |
Operative part
The Court:
1. |
Dismisses the appeal; |
2. |
Orders XXXLutz Marken GmbH to pay the costs. |