In T- 281/09, the Court confirmed the Board's decision on the ground that the mark CHROMA was descriptive for the purposes of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation No 207/2009. It found that the sign at issue constituted the transliteration into Latin characters of the Greek word ‘χρώμα’ (colour) and that, since it was a descriptive indication of the characteristics of the goods concerned, there was an absolute ground for refusal in Greece and Cyprus.

The goods concerned are sanitary appliances of ceramic in Class 11 and building materials, not of metal, in Class 19, which may be purchased both by the end consumer and by construction firms.

The use of the word ‘colour’ thus conveys a message which is capable of being grasped immediately by the consumer concerned as it indicates that there is a range of goods in various colours, in particular, as regards ceramic sanitary appliances and ceramic building materials for bathrooms, in colours other than traditional white. Furthermore, the goods at issue are likely to be requested on the basis of the range of colours in which they come, with a view to matching them in decorative creations.

Thus, from the point of view of the relevant Greek-speaking consumer, the sign CHROMA could serve to indicate that the goods concerned in Classes 11 and 19 were available in various colours and that it therefore designated a relevant characteristic in terms of the marketing of the goods in question; it is in addition irrelevant whether the characteristic which may be designated is commercially essential or ancillary.