Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 3 March 2015 —
Bial-Portela v OHIM — Isdin (ZEBEXIR)
(Case T‑366/11 RENV)
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 — Action before the EU judicature — Jurisdiction of the General Court — Direction issued to the Office — Exclusion (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 65(6)) (see para. 26)
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 29, 50)
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 51, 52)
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. |