EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62004TJ0499

Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) of 17 October 2006.
Hammarplast AB v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).
Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community word mark STENINGE SLOTT - Earlier word mark STENINGE KERAMIK - Likelihood of confusion.
Case T-499/04.

European Court Reports 2006 II-00084*

ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:T:2006:324





Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber) of 17 October 2006 – Hammarplast v OHIM – Steninge Slott (STENINGE SLOTT)

(Case T-499/04)

Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community word mark STENINGE SLOTT – Earlier word mark STENINGE KERAMIK – Likelihood of confusion

1.                     Community trade mark – Appeals procedure (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 74(1)) (see para. 20)

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 (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 62-63)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 25 October 2004 (Case R 394/2003-2) concerning the opposition filed by the holder of the national trade mark STENINGE KERAMIK against registration of the Community trade mark STENINGE SLOTT.

Information relating to the case      

Applicant for the Community trade mark:

Steninge Slott AB

Community trade mark sought:

Word mark STENINGE SLOTT for goods in Class 21

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Hammarplast AB

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

National mark STENINGE KERAMIK for goods in the same class

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Refusal of registration

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Appeal allowed


Operative part

The Court:

 

Dismisses the action;

 

Orders the applicant to pay the costs.

Top