Language of document : ECLI:EU:T:2017:800





Judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) of 14 November 2017 – Claranet Europe v EUIPO – Claro (claranet)

(Case T-129/16)

(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark claranet — Earlier Benelux word mark CLARO — Relative ground for refusal — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

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 18, 20, 88)

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 – Figurative mark claranet and word mark CLARO

(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see paras 21, 22, 89, 90)

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 between the goods or services in question – Criteria for assessment

(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see para 23)

4.      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 26-28, 35)

5.      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 – Similarity of the marks concerned – Assessment of the distinctiveness of an element composing a trade mark

(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see para 29)

6.      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 – Elements of a trade mark having a descriptive character

(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see para 36)

7.      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 – Weak distinctive character of the earlier mark – Effect

(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see para 47)

8.      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 – Identical number of letters composing two word marks – Presence of several letters in the same order

(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see para. 54)

9.      EU trade mark – Decisions of the Office – Principle of equal treatment – Principle of sound administration – EUIPO’s previous decision-making practice – Principle of legality – Need for a strict and complete examination in each particular case

(Council Regulation No 207/2009)

(see paras 94-96)

10.    EU trade mark – Procedural provisions – Statement of reasons for decisions – First sentence of Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009 – Scope identical to that of Article 296 TFEU

(Art. 296 TFEU; Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 75, first sentence)

(see para. 101)

11.    EU trade mark – Procedural provisions – Statement of reasons for decisions – Scope

(Art. 296 TFEU; Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 75, first sentence)

(see para. 102)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 January 2016 (Case R 803/2015-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Claro and Claranet Europe.

Operative part

The Court:

1.       Dismisses the action;

2.       Orders Claranet Europe Ltd to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).