ECLI:EU:T:2012:527•Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 9 October 2012.#Bial-Portela & Cª, SA v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs).#Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark ZEBEXIR — Earlier Community word mark ZEBINIX — Relative grounds for refusal — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009.#Case T‑366/11.
Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 9 October 2012.#Bial-Portela & Cª, SA v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs).#Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark ZEBEXIR — Earlier Community word mark ZEBINIX — Relative grounds for refusal — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009.#Case T‑366/11.
ECLI:EU:T:2012:527Eu Chamb 04 TOct 9, 2012
Full text
Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 9 October 2012 — Bial Portela v OHIM — Isdin (ZEBEXIR)
(Case T-366/11)
Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark ZEBEXIR — Earlier Community word mark ZEBINIX — Relative grounds for refusal — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
1. Community trade mark — Appeals procedure — Appeal before a Court of the European Union — Jurisdiction of the General Court — Direction issued to the Office — Not included (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 65(6)) (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 — Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark — Assessment of the likelihood of confusion — Criteria (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 17, 38)
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 ZEBEXIR and ZEBINIX (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 18, 19, 37, 40)
Re:
| ACTION brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 April 2011 (Case R 1212/2009 1), concerning opposition proceedings between Bial-Portela & Ca, SA and Isdin, SA. |
Operative part
The Court:
|
1. |
Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 6 April 2011 (Case R 1212/2009-1); |
|
2. |
Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay those of Bial-Portela & Ca, SA; |
|
3. |
Orders Isdin, SA to bear its own costs. |
Wondering how this text applies to your situation?
Free consultation, no commitment
Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.