This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62018TJ0403
Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 11 April 2019.
Pharmadom v European Union Intellectual Property Office.
EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark WS wellpharma shop — Earlier national word mark WELL AND WELL — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001.
Case T-403/18.
Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 11 April 2019.
Pharmadom v European Union Intellectual Property Office.
EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark WS wellpharma shop — Earlier national word mark WELL AND WELL — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001.
Case T-403/18.
Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 11 April 2019 –
Pharmadom v EUIPO — Objectif Pharma (WS wellpharma shop)
(Case T‑403/18)
(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for EU figurative mark WS wellpharma shop — Earlier national word mark WELL AND WELL — 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 para. 18) |
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 — Similarity of the marks concerned — Criteria for assessment — Composite mark (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 19, 20) |
3. |
EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark — Prior registration of the trade mark in certain Member States — Effect (see para. 42) |
4. |
EU trade mark — Decisions of the Office — Legality — Examination by the EU judicature — Criteria (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001) (see para. 43) |
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 — Visual similarity between a figurative mark and a word mark (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see para. 47) |
6. |
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 — Weighing elements of similarity or difference between the signs — Taking into account of the intrinsic characteristics of the signs or the conditions in which the goods or services are marketed (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see para. 64) |
7. |
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 — Figurative mark WS wellpharma shop and word mark WELL AND WELL (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 66-69) |
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 March 2018 (Case R 1448/2017-5) relating to opposition proceedings between Pharmadom and Objectif Pharma.
Operative part
The Court:
1. |
Dismisses the action; |
2. |
Orders Pharmadom to pay the costs. |