Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 4 February 2014 — Free v OHIM — Noble Gaming (FREEVOLUTION TM)
(Case T‑127/12)
Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the Community figurative mark FREEVOLUTION TM — Earlier national figurative mark free LA LIBERTÉ N’A PAS DE PRIX and earlier national word marks FREE and FREE MOBILE — Relative grounds for refusal — No likelihood of confusion — No similarity between the signs — Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009
1. 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 19, 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 — Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark — Figurative mark FREEVOLUTION TM — Figurative mark free LA LIBERTÉ N’A PAS DE PRIX and word marks FREE and FREE MOBILE (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b) and (2)) (see paras 22, 23, 53-55)
3. Community trade mark — Appeals procedure — Action before the EU judicature — Possibility for the General Court to alter the contested decision — Limits (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 65(2) and (3)) (see paras 27, 28)
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 of the marks concerned — Criteria for assessment — Complex mark (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 30-35)
5. 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 enjoying a reputation — Protection of well-known earlier mark extended to dissimilar goods or services — Conditions — Link between the marks (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(5)) (see paras 63, 70, 71)
Re:
| ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 13 December 2011 (Case R 2326/2010-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Free SAS and Noble Gaming Ltd. |
Operative part
The Court:
2. | | Orders Fre SAS to pay the costs. |