Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62008TJ0374

    Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 12 July 2011.
    Aldi Einkauf GmbH & Co. OHG v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).
    Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark TOP CRAFT - Earlier national figurative marks Krafft - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) - Genuine use of the earlier marks - Article 43(2) of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 42(2) of Regulation No 207/2009) and Rule 22 of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95.
    Case T-374/08.

    Thuarascálacha na Cúirte Eorpaí 2011 II-00219*

    ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2011:346





    Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 12 July 2011 – Aldi Einkauf v OHIM – Illinois Tools Works (TOP CRAFT)

    (Case T-374/08)

    Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the Community figurative mark TOP CRAFT – Earlier national figurative marks Krafft – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) – Genuine use of the earlier marks – Article 43(2) of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 42(2) of Regulation No 207/2009) and Rule 22 of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95

    1.                     Community trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Genuine use – Concept – Interpretation having regard to the rationale of Article 43(2) and (3) of Regulation No 40/94 (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 43(2) and (3)) (see para. 24)

    2.                     Community trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Genuine use – Concept – Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 43(2) and (3)) (see paras 25-27)

    3.                     Community trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Genuine use – Application of the criteria to the case in question (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 43(2) and (3)) (see para. 28)

    4.                     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 – Complex mark (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 44, 51, 56, 64)

    5.                     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 (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 47-48, 67)

    Re:

    ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 25 June 2008 (Case R 952/2007-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Illinois Tools Works, Inc. and Aldi Einkauf GmbH & Co. OHG.

    Operative part

    The Court:

    1.

    Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 25 June 2008 (Case R 952/2007-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Illinois Tools Works, Inc. and Aldi Einkauf GmbH & Co. OHG);

    2.

    Orders OHIM to pay the costs.

    Top