Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 11 September 2024 –
Borco-Marken-Import Matthiesen v EUIPO – Belles Marks (KINGSBURY)

(Case T‑603/23)

(EU trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the EU word mark KINGSBURY – Earlier EU word mark FINSBURY – 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 identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of 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 paragraphs 14, 15, 59)

2. 

EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Assessment of the likelihood of confusion – Determination of the relevant public – Level of attention of the public

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see paragraph 17)

3. 

EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Similarity between the goods or services in question – Criteria for assessment

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see paragraph 22)

4. 

EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Word marks KINGSBURY and FINSBURY

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see paragraphs 27, 35, 36, 45, 50, 55, 60-62)

5. 

EU trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered in respect of identical or similar goods or services – Similarity between the marks concerned – Criteria for assessment

(European Parliament and Council Regulation 2017/1001, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see paragraphs 28, 32, 40)

Operative part

The Court:

1. 

Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 28 July 2023 (Case R 481/2023-1);

2. 

Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Borco-Marken-Import Matthiesen GmbH & Co. KG.