This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62007TJ0021
Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) of 25 March 2009. # L’Oréal SA v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM). # Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark SPALINE - Earlier national word mark SPA - Relative ground for refusal - Damage to reputation - Unfair advantage derived from the reputation of the earlier mark - Use of the mark applied for without due cause - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94. # Case T-21/07.
Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) of 25 March 2009.
L’Oréal SA v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).
Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark SPALINE - Earlier national word mark SPA - Relative ground for refusal - Damage to reputation - Unfair advantage derived from the reputation of the earlier mark - Use of the mark applied for without due cause - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94.
Case T-21/07.
Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) of 25 March 2009.
L’Oréal SA v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).
Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark SPALINE - Earlier national word mark SPA - Relative ground for refusal - Damage to reputation - Unfair advantage derived from the reputation of the earlier mark - Use of the mark applied for without due cause - Article 8(5) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94.
Case T-21/07.
Izvješća Suda EU-a 2009 II-00031*
ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2009:80
Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Fifth Chamber) of 25 March 2009 – L’Oréal v OHIM – Spa Monopole (SPALINE)
(Case T-21/07)
Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the Community word mark SPALINE – Earlier national word mark SPA – Relative ground for refusal – Damage to reputation – Unfair advantage derived from the reputation of the earlier mark – Use of the mark applied for without due cause – Article 8(5) 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 enjoying a reputation – Protection of well-known earlier mark extended to dissimilar goods or services (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(5)) (see paras 21, 24-25, 35-36, 40)
Re:
| ACTION brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 18 October 2006 (Case R 415/2005-1), concerning opposition proceedings between Spa Monopole, compagnie fermière de Spa SA/NV and L’Oréal SA. |
Information relating to the case
|
Applicant for the Community trade mark: |
L’Oréal SA |
|
Community trade mark sought: |
Community mark SPALINE for goods in Class 3 – Application No 989236 |
|
Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: |
Spa Monopole, compagnie fermière de Spa SA/NV |
|
Mark or sign cited in opposition: |
National and international word marks SPA, LIP SPA, SPA SKIN CARE and Les Thermes de Spa for goods in Classes 3, 32 and 42. |
|
Decision of the Opposition Division: |
Opposition upheld |
|
Decision of the Board of Appeal: |
Appeal dismissed |
Operative part
The Court:
|
1. |
Dismisses the action; |
|
2. |
Orders L’Oréal SA to pay the costs. |