Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62015TA0212

    Case T-212/15: Judgment of the General Court of 15 December 2016 — Aldi v EUIPO — Miquel Alimentació Grup (Gourmet) (EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark Gourmet — Earlier national word and figurative marks GOURMET and Gourmet — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

    OJ C 38, 6.2.2017, p. 28–29 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    6.2.2017   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 38/28


    Judgment of the General Court of 15 December 2016 — Aldi v EUIPO — Miquel Alimentació Grup (Gourmet)

    (Case T-212/15) (1)

    ((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark Gourmet - Earlier national word and figurative marks GOURMET and Gourmet - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

    (2017/C 038/38)

    Language of the case: German

    Parties

    Applicant: Aldi GmbH & Co. KG (Mülheim an der Ruhr, Germany) (represented by: C. Fürsen, N. Lützenrath, U. Rademacher and N. Bertram, lawyers)

    Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: M. Eberl and M. Fischer, acting as Agents)

    Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Miquel Alimentació Grup, SA (Vilamalla, Spain) (represented by: C. Duch Fonoll and R. Niebel, lawyers)

    Re:

    Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 February 2015 (Case R 0314/2014-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Miquel Alimentació Grup and Aldi.

    Operative part of the judgment

    The Court:

    1.

    Dismisses the action;

    2.

    Orders Aldi GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.


    (1)  OJ C 198, 15.6.2015.


    Top