EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62011TJ0605
Novartis v OHMI - Dr Organic (BIOCERT)
Novartis v OHMI - Dr Organic (BIOCERT)
Judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) of 10 December 2014 — Novartis v OHIM — Dr Organic (BIOCERT)
(Case T‑605/11)
‛Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the Community word mark BIOCERT — Earlier national word mark BIOCEF — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009’
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 — Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark — Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see para. 14) |
2. |
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 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 25, 26, 28, 29) |
3. |
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 — Word marks BIOCERT and BIOCEF (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 30-32, 54-60) |
Re:
ACTION brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 28 September 2011 (Case R 1030/2010-4), concerning opposition proceedings between Novartis AG and Dr Organic Ltd.
Operative part
The Court:
1. |
Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 28 September 2011 (Case R 1030/2010-4); |
2. |
Orders OHIM to pay the costs. |