In Judgment T-214/09, the General Court upheld the finding of likelihood of confusion between the applied for trademark COR and earlier Spanish mark CADENACOR for goods in Classes 20 and 27.

First, the goods covered are identical in relation to furniture and similar in relation to carpets. In particular, carpets share the same intended purpose as furniture and are aesthetically complementary, as they are matched to make the overall appearance of the house harmonious and are often sold in the same specialised shops of interior decoration.

Second, the Spanish public will perceive the earlier sign as being composed of two elements, ‘cadena’ and ‘cor’, together meaning ‘COR chain [of shops]’ , so ‘cor’ as a fanciful element, is the only distinctive element of that trade mark and identical to the contested trademark. In fact, the descriptive reference to the distribution system in which the goods are sold (‘cadena’) could not put the signs conceptually apart.