The past few months have seen a host of judgments by the General Court on appeal from decisions of OHIM’s Boards of Appeal. Chris McLeod analyses the key decisions.
In Case T-462/09, August Storck KG v The Office for Harmonization for the Internal Market (OHIM) (January 12, 2012), the General Court rejected an appeal against the refusal of Storck’s Community trademark (CTM) application for the word mark ‘Ragolizia’ on the basis of an opposition based on an earlier registration of the word mark ‘Favolizia’.
This case confirmed that the court will be reluctant to find that consumers have anything but a low level of attention when buying everyday consumer products such as foodstuffs, and that if marks share a majority of letters, then phonetic and visual similarity and, therefore, a likelihood of confusion, are almost inevitable.
In Case T249-10, Kitzinger & Co (GmbH & Co KG) v OHIM (January 17, 2012), the General Court upheld a decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal to reject Kitzinger’s CTM application filed in May 2005 for the stylised mark ‘Kico’, covering goods in class 16, on the basis of earlier registrations of ‘Kika’.
The rest of this article is locked for subscribers only. Please login to continue reading.
If you don't have a login, you will need to purchase a subscription to gain access to this article, including all our online content. Please use this link and follow the steps.
To request a FREE 2-week trial subscription, use the same link but select the 'trial' option in the dropdown box. NOTE - this can take up to 48hrs to be approved.
For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription to us that we can add you to for FREE, please email Atif Choudhury at firstname.lastname@example.org
OHIM, CTM, confusion, fair use