ORDER OF THE GENERAL COURT (Second Chamber)
17 September 2019 (*)
(Rectification)
In Case T‑328/17,
Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named Halloumi, established in Nicosia (Cyprus), represented by S. Malynicz QC, V. Marsland, Solicitor, and S. Baran, Barrister,
applicant,
v
European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), represented by M. Rajh, D. Walicka and D. Gája, acting as Agents,
defendant,
the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, and intervener before the General Court, being
M. J. Dairies EOOD, established in Sofia (Bulgaria), represented by D. Dimitrova, lawyer,
ACTION brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 March 2017 (Case R 497/2016-4), concerning opposition proceedings between the Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named Halloumi and M. J. Dairies,
THE GENERAL COURT (Second Chamber),
composed of M. Prek, President, F. Schalin (Rapporteur) and M. J. Costeira, Judges,
Registrar: E. Coulon,
makes the following
Order
1 On 25 September 2018, the Court delivered the judgment in Case T‑328/17, Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named Halloumi v EUIPO — M. J. Dairies (BBQLOUMI) (not published, EU:T:2018:594).
2 Paragraph 71 of the version of that judgment in the language of the case differs from a public version of that judgment in another language available on the Curia website.
3 Moreover, paragraph 71 of the version of the judgment in the language of the case is not in line with the arguments of the General Court in paragraphs 62, 64 and 68 of the judgment, regarding the visual, phonetic and conceptual similarity of the signs at issue.
4 Therefore, pursuant to Article 164(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, and after the parties were given the opportunity to submit written observations in accordance with Article 164(3) of those rules, it is necessary to rectify a clerical mistake in paragraph 71 of the version of that judgment in the language of the case.
On those grounds,
THE GENERAL COURT (Second Chamber)
hereby orders:
Paragraph 71 of the judgment of 25 September 2018, Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named Halloumi v EUIPO — M. J. Dairies (BBQLOUMI) (T‑328/17, not published, EU:T:2018:594), in the version in the language of the case, should read:
‘Despite the fact that, with the exception of the services covered by the mark applied for, the goods covered by the marks at issue are in part identical and in part similar to some degree, there can be no likelihood of confusion in the mind of the relevant public since the existence of a low degree of similarity from a visual, phonetic and conceptual point of view is not, in the case of an earlier mark having a descriptive meaning and therefore having a weak distinctive character, sufficient to establish the existence of a likelihood of confusion (see, to that effect, judgment of 13 June 2012, HELLIM, T‑534/10, EU:T:2012:292, paragraphs 54 and 55).’
instead of
‘Despite the fact that, with the exception of the services covered by the mark applied for, the goods covered by the marks at issue are in part identical and in part similar to some degree, there cannot be any likelihood of confusion on the part of the relevant public since the existence of a visual, phonetic and conceptual similarity is not, in the case of an earlier descriptive mark with low distinctive character, sufficient to give rise to a presumption of a likelihood of confusion (see, to that effect, judgment of 13 June 2012, HELLIM, T‑534/10, EU:T:2012:292, paragraphs 54 and 55).’
Luxembourg, 17 September 2019.