Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 12 July 2011 – Aldi Einkauf v OHIM – Illinois Tools Works (TOP CRAFT)

(Case T-374/08)

Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for the Community figurative mark TOP CRAFT – Earlier national figurative marks Krafft – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) – Genuine use of the earlier marks – Article 43(2) of Regulation No 40/94 (now Article 42(2) of Regulation No 207/2009) and Rule 22 of Regulation (EC) No 2868/95

1.                     Community trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Genuine use – Concept – Interpretation having regard to the rationale of Article 43(2) and (3) of Regulation No 40/94 (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 43(2) and (3)) (see para. 24)

2.                     Community trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Genuine use – Concept – Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 43(2) and (3)) (see paras 25-27)

3.                     Community trade mark – Observations of third parties and opposition – Examination of the opposition – Proof of use of the earlier mark – Genuine use – Application of the criteria to the case in question (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 43(2) and (3)) (see para. 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 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 44, 51, 56, 64)

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 registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 47-48, 67)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 25 June 2008 (Case R 952/2007-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Illinois Tools Works, Inc. and Aldi Einkauf GmbH & Co. OHG.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 25 June 2008 (Case R 952/2007-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Illinois Tools Works, Inc. and Aldi Einkauf GmbH & Co. OHG);

2. Orders OHIM to pay the costs.