In Judgment T-189/09, the CTM was opposed on the basis of the two following trademarks:

    and

The first trademark was not taken into account because there was no proof of serious use.

The General Court found there is similarity between the signs given the low distinctive character for POLYPIPE for goods in Classes 6, 11, 17, 19 and 20 related among others to ‘pipes’, thus the dominant element is the figurative element which is clearly a stylized P. The term ‘polypipe’ may be a neologism but is in conformity with the English grammar rules and will be understood by the relevant public, composed of average and specialized consumer.

Therefore, the trademarks are similar visually and phonetically, the fact that the Board erroneously considered there was a conceptual similarity, does not prevent a finding of likelihood of confusion for identical and similar goods.