In Judgments T-460/09 and T-461/09, the OHIM had excluded any likelihood of confusion between the conflicting signs, even though the services at issue were in part identical, in part similar, due to the very low degree of distinctive character of the earlier marks for the registered services.

  v.  

Contested CTM                                         One of the earlier rights

The GC annulled the decision of the 4^th Board of Appeal on the grounds that it did not sufficiently substantiate its view regarding the descriptive character of the word ‘cheapflights’ and the representation of an aeroplane with regard to all the services covered by the marks at issue, such as 'weather information' or 'medical advisory services for travellers'. Consequently, its finding as to the absence of a likelihood of confusion between the marks at issue, in so far as it is based on the allegedly descriptive character of the elements common to those marks, is based on a premiss which truth has not been proved to the required legal standard.