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
SUNDAY, 6 NOVEMBER 2016
Battle of the -Cali marks in General Court

In Case T‑512/15, the General Court upheld the decision of the Board  of Appeal regarding the invalidity action below brought on relative grounds:

Sun Cali, Inc. - Applicant

Abercrombie & Fitch Europe SA,

Image not found

earlier Italian mark

 

Image not found

 

Classes 18, 25, 35 and 45

all goods in Class 25

The Cancellation Division partly granted the application for a declaration of invalidity declared the contested mark invalid in respect of the goods in Classes 18 and 25, holding that, in view of the coincidence in the element ‘cali’, the dominant element in the earlier mark, there was a likelihood of confusion between the marks.

The Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO (i) dismissed the appeal brought by the applicant as inadmissible, holding that the applicant was not duly represented in accordance with Article 92(2) of Regulation No 207/2009, and (ii) partly allowed the appeal brought by Abercrombie & Fitch Europe in respect of the services in Class 35 as being similar with the goods in Class 25.

The GC upheld that the BOA's finding that the evidence produced by the applicant, namely (a) extracts from a website, (b) photographs supposedly showing the front of a commercial establishment in Munich, and (c) an authorisation form authorising an employee to represent the applicant, are clearly not relevant information and explanations capable of proving, the existence of a real and effective commercial establishment in the EU within the meaning of Article 92(3) of Regulation No 207/2009. Nevertheless, the applicant was a party to those appeal proceedings as of right and under Article 65(4) of EUTMR, the applicant was thus entitled to seek annulment of the contested decision.

Regarding the comparison of goods and services, the Court confirmed that 'retail store services featuring clothing, shoes and handbags’ in Class 35, are similar to ‘clothing’ and ‘shoes’ in Class 25. Regarding the marks, given the presence of the common word element ‘cali’, there is a certain degree of visual and phonetic similarity. The dissimilarities, consisting in particular of their figurative elements and the word elements ‘co’ and ‘sun’, are incapable of dispelling the similarity impression on the part of the relevant public. The Court upheld the finding of confusion and BOA's decision.

Posted by: Laetitia Lagarde @ 20.41
Tags: General court, suncali, calico, representation,
Sharing on Social Media? Use the link below...
Perm-A-Link: https://www.marques.org/blogs/class46?XID=BHA4450
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