Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 18 June 2014 — Cantina Broglie 1 v OHIM — Camera di Commercio, Industria, Artigianato e Agricoltura di Verona (RIPASSA)

(Case T‑595/10)

Community trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for Community word mark RIPASSA — Earlier national word mark VINO DI RIPASSO — Relative ground for refusal — Article 75 of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Obligation to state reasons

1.                     Community trade mark — Procedural provisions — Statement of reasons for decisions — Article 75, first sentence, of Regulation No 207/2009 — Scope identical to that of Article 296 TFEU (Art. 296 TFEU; Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 75) (see para. 18)

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 19, 20)

3.                     Community trade mark — Appeals procedure — Action before the EU judicature — Decision of an OHIM body forming part of the context of the decision of the Board of Appeal (see para. 26)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the first Board of Appeal of OHIM of 30 September 2010 (Case R 63/2010‑1) relating to opposition proceedings between the Camera di Commercio, Industria, Artigianato e Agricoltura di Verona and Mr Alberto Zenato.

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 30 September 2010 (Case R 63/2010‑1);

2. Orders OHIM to pay the costs, including those incurred in the proceedings before the Board of Appeal.