Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62003TJ0286

    Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) of 13 April 2005.
    The Gillette Company v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).
    Community mark.
    Case T-286/03.

    European Court Reports 2005 II-00008*

    ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2005:126





    Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) of 13 April 2005 − Gillette v OHIM – Wilkinson Sword (RIGHT GUARD XTREME sport)

    (Case T‑286/03)

    Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community figurative mark RIGHT GUARD XTREME sport – Earlier national figurative mark WILKINSON SWORD XTREME III – Likelihood of confusion – Refusal of registration – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94

    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 – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Figurative marks ‘RIGHT GUARD XTREME sport’ and ‘WILKINSON SWORD XTREME III’ (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 81-82)

    Re:

    ACTION against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 17 April 2003 (Case R 221/2002-4), refusing registration of the figurative mark RIGHT GUARD XTREME sport.

    Information relating to the case

    Applicant for the Community trade mark:

    The Gillette Company

    Community trade mark sought:

    The figurative mark ‘RIGHT GUARD XTREME sport’ for goods in Class 3 – Application No 1486745

    Proprietor of mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

    Wilkinson Sword GmbH

    Mark or sign cited in opposition:

    German figurative marks ‘WILKINSON SWORD XTREME III’ for goods in Class 3

    Decision of the Opposition Division:

    Rejection of the opposition

    Decision of the Board of Appeal:

    Annulment of the decision of the Opposition Division and refusal of the applicant’s application


    Operative part

    The Court:

    1.

    Dismisses the action;

    2.

    Orders the applicant to pay the costs.

    Top