Judgment of the General Court (Third Chamber) of 1 June 2016 —
Mega Brands v EUIPO — Diset (MAGNEXT)

(Case T‑292/12 RENV)

European Union trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for European Union word mark MAGNEXT — Earlier national word mark MAGNET 4 — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Similarity of the signs — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009

1.                     EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU 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 17, 18, 38)

2.                     EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU 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 MAGNEXT and MAGNET 4 (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 20, 30, 36, 42)

3.                     EU trade mark — Definition and acquisition of the EU 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 — Composite mark (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 23, 24, 31, 34)

4.                     EU trade mark — Appeals procedure — Action before the EU judicature — Power of the General Court to alter the contested decision — Limits (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 65(3)) (see para. 44)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 24 April 2012 (Case R 1722/2011-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Diset and Mega Brands International, Luxembourg, Zweigniederlassung Zug.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 24 April 2012 (Case R 1722/2011‑4);

2. Orders EUIPO to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Mega Brands International, Luxembourg, Zweigniederlassung Zug.