CJEU rejects appeal over organic products TM

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has dismissed a trademark appeal from French organic foods and nutrition company Groupe Léa Nature.

The CJEU’s Ninth Chamber yesterday, February 28, affirmed an earlier decision of the EU General Court that found that there was likelihood of confusion between Léa Nature’s “SO’BiO ētic” and Portuguese company Debonair Trading’s “SO…?” marks.

The CJEU’s ruling backed the EU Intellectual Property Office’s earlier conclusions.

Léa Nature applied to register the “SO’BiO ētic” mark with the EUIPO in March 2008. The mark covered classes 3 and 25, including organic cleaning products and clothes.

Debonair opposed the mark in in 2008, citing two marks for “SO…?” in classes 3 and 25, registered in February 2001 and January 2008 respectively.

After the EUIPO’s opposition division dismissed the Debonair’s bid to have the mark cancelled in 2010, Debonair appealed against the decision to the office’s First Board of Appeal.

The appeals board overturned the opposition division’s decision, finding that there was a likelihood of confusion between the marks at issue.

Léa Nature responded by filing an appeal with the EU General Court, seeking to reverse the appeals board’s decision and restore its mark.

After the case was dismissed, Léa Nature had been seeking for the case to be returned to the General Court for review, and for Debonair to pay the costs.

The CJEU, however, rejected Léa Nature’s arguments. In the ruling, it found that the General Court had weighted the different elements in Léa Nature’s mark fairly when considering the likelihood of confusion.

Léa Nature argued that the General Court had failed to adhere to established case law when assessing the similarity of the signs.

According to the French company, the court had failed to take into the account the distinctive and dominant character of the element “so”, which it said was the only common element to the marks.

The court had found that the “bio” element of the mark had the same importance as “so”. The CJEU affirmed its findings, ruling that the court had correctly applied case law when determining whether there was a likelihood of confusion between the marks at issue.

The CJEU awarded costs to Debonair and the EUIPO.

Did you enjoy reading this story?  Sign up to our free daily newsletters and get stories like this sent straight to your inbox.

Today's top stories:

Biker trademark cannot be part of criminal forfeiture, court rules

Maxell and Asus to settle smartphone patent dispute

Fyre Festival attendee takes Netflix to court

Musician claims Spike Lee and Prince copied the song for ‘Girl 6’