Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 16 October 2014 —
Junited Autoglas Deutschland v OHIM — Belron Hungary (United Autoglas)

(Case T‑297/13)

Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the Community word mark United Autoglas — Earlier national figurative mark AUTOGLASS — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) 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 19-21, 60)

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 — Similarity of the marks concerned — Criteria for assessment (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 25, 27, 41, 47, 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 mark United Autoglas and figurative mark AUTOGLASS (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 31-36, 53, 59, 63, 64)

4.                     Community trade mark — Decisions of the Office — Legality — Examination by the Community judicature — Criteria (Council Regulation No 207/2009) (see para. 38)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 3 April 2013 (Case R 206/2012‑2) concerning opposition proceedings between Belron Hungary Kft — Zug Branch and Junited Autoglas Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Junited Autoglas Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.