Judgment of the General Court of 5 February 2015 — Red Bull v OHIM — Sun Mark (BULLDOG)
(Case T-78/13) 1
(Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark BULLDOG — Earlier international and national word marks BULL and RED BULL — Relative grounds for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Identical nature of the goods — Similarity of the signs — Conceptual similarity — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicant: Red Bull GmbH (Fuschl am See, Austria) (represented: initially by A. Renck, T. Heitmann, lawyers, and I. Fowler, Solicitor, and subsequently by A. Renck and I. Fowler)
Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented initially by: F. Mattina, subsequently by P. Bullock and A. Schifko, acting as Agents, subsequently by D. Walicka and finally by M. Schifko)
Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Sun Mark Ltd (Middlesex, United Kingdom)
Re:
Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 16 November 2012 (Case R 107/2012-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Red Bull GmbH and Sun Mark Ltd.
Operative part of the judgment
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 16 November 2012 (Case R 107/2012-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Red Bull GmbH and Sun Mark Ltd;
2. Declares inadmissible Red Bull’s form of order requesting that Sun Mark be ordered to pay the costs
3. Orders OHIM to pay the costs.
________________________1 OJ C 108, 13.4.2013.