Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 22 January 2015 — MIP Metro v OHIM — Holsten-Brauerei (H)
(Case T‑193/12)
Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — International registration designating the European Community — Figurative mark H — Earlier national figurative mark H — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Failure to state reasons — Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009
1. Community trade mark — Appeals procedure — Action before the EU judicature — Jurisdiction of the General Court — Re-evaluation of the facts in the light of evidence produced for the first time before it — Exclusion (Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 135(4); Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 65) (see para. 16)
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 — Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 20-22, 51)
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 — Figurative marks H (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 23, 55-58)
4. 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 — Similarity between the goods or services in question — Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 25, 26)
5. Community trade mark — Procedural provisions — Statement of reasons for decisions — Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 — Scope identical to that of 296 TFEU (Art. 296 TFEU; Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 75) (see para. 60)
Re:
| ACTION brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 23 February 2012 (Case R 2340/2010-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Holsten-Brauerei AG and MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG. |
Operative part
The Court:
2. | | Orders MIP Metro Group Intellectual Property GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs. |