Now in its twelfth year, Class 46 is dedicated to European trade mark law and practice. This weblog is written by a team of enthusiasts who want to spread the word and share their thoughts with others.
Who we all are...
MONDAY, 17 OCTOBER 2011
General Court: NC NICKOL v NIKE
Following its previous defeats in the General Court over CTM registrations reported here, Nike did it again.
On the basis of Article 8 (5) CTMR, the OHIM had upheld the opposition between the two following trademarks for identical goods in Class 9, holding that there is a risk the Applicant takes unfair advantage of the earlier well-known mark:
In Judgment T-207/09, the General Court however censored the BoA for committing an error of law. The Board had assessed the similarity of the marks in a contradictory manner by finding (par. 23 of the contested decision) a lack of similarity between the mark applied for and the earlier mark when examining the conditions for the application of Article 8(1)(b) of CTMR but a sufficient degree of similarity (par. 36 of the contested decision) between the same signs for the application of Article 8(5) of the same regulation.
Posted by: Laetitia Lagarde @ 09.46
general court, likelihood of confusion, nike, nc nikol, error of law, board of appeal,
Sharing on Social Media? Use the link below...
Reader Comments: 0
Post a Comment
MARQUES does not guarantee the accuracy of the information in this blog. The views are those of the individual contributors and do not necessarily reflect those of MARQUES. Seek professional advice before action on any information included here.
The Class 46 Archive