Log in

CLASS 46


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.

Want to receive Class 46 by email?
Click here subscribe for free.

Who we all are...
Anthonia Ghalamkarizadeh
Birgit Clark
Blog Administrator
Christian Tenkhoff
Fidel Porcuna
Gino Van Roeyen
Markku Tuominen
Niamh Hall
Nikos Prentoulis
Stefan Schröter
Tomasz Rychlicki
Yvonne Onomor
FRIDAY, 17 JANUARY 2014
Absacker and German consumer in General Court: one last trademark case before you go home?

In Case T-304/12, the General Court had to review the following German opposition:

Message Management GmbH- contested CTM

Absacker GmbH –earlier German Mark

Classes 25, 32 including ‘drinks’ and 33

Classes 25, 33 and 43 including‘restaurant and hotel services’

The Opposition division rejected the opposition. The First Board of Appeal cancelled the OD decision. It found the relevant public is the average German consumer who will not be particularly attentive.

First, the goods in Classes 25 and 33 are identical and the goods in Class 32 are similar to the services in Class 43.

Secondly, the signs are very similar from a visual and aural point of view: the font used is almost the same and the slight difference is barely visible; the earlier mark represents a seal and the contested CTM seems a “sort” of seal, the word “of Germany” in the contested CTM is written in a very small font so that ABSACKER is clearly the dominant element; both signs use black & white colours- the fact that the background and words are inversed, is slightly noticeable due to the chrome palette used.

From a conceptual point of view, the word “Absacker” is descriptive for alcoholic drinks for the German consumer and thus has a low distinctive character, in particular it is generally associated to the last alcoholic drink/glass before going [home] to sleep (or "One for the road")- like risk of confusion cases -a very relative term.

Finally, the rejection of the opposition by the Deutschen Patent- und Markenamts (German Patent and Trademark office) in a case opposing ABSACKER v. ABSACKERTUM is not relevant to these facts. Therefore, there is a risk of confusion according to Article 8 (1) b) CTMR.

Posted by: Laetitia Lagarde @ 16.24
Tags: General court, likelihood of confusion, absacker,
Sharing on Social Media? Use the link below...
Perm-A-Link: https://www.marques.org/blogs/class46?XID=BHA3560
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






 

 

 

 

 

 


CONTACT

info@marques.org
+44 (0)116 2747355
+44 (0)116 2747365
POST ADDRESS

Unit Q, Troon Way Business Centre
Humberstone Lane, Leicester
LE4 9HA

EMAIL

Ingrid de Groot
Internal Relations Officer
ingrid.de.groot@marques.org
Alessandra Romeo
External Relations Officer
aromeo@marques.org
James Nurton
Newsletter Editor
editor@marques.org
Robert Harrison
Webmaster
robertharrison@marques.org
BLOGS

Signup for our blogs.
Headlines delivered to your inbox