The General Court of the European Union has ruled in case T‑241/16, El Corte Inglés, SA, e v European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).
The case concerns an attempt for registration of a Eu trademark EW for the following goods:
– Class 3: ‘Bleaching preparations and other substances for laundry use; cleaning, polishing, scouring and abrasive preparations; soaps; perfumery, essential oils, cosmetics, hair lotions; dentifrices’;
– Class 18: ‘Leather and imitations of leather, and goods made of these materials and not included in other classes; animal skins, hides; trunks and travelling bags; umbrellas and parasols; walking sticks; whips, harness and saddlery’;
– Class 25: ‘Clothing, footwear, headgear’.
Against this mark an opposition was been filed based on an earlier European trademark WE for the following goods:
– Class 3: ‘Soaps, perfumery, essential oils, cosmetics, hair lotions’;
– Class 18: ‘Leather and imitations of leather, and goods made of these materials and not included in other classes; umbrellas and parasols; trunks and travelling bags; bags not included in other classes’;
– Class 25: ‘Clothing, footwear, headgear’.
The EUIPO upheld the opposition concluding that both signs are confusingly similar. The Board of Appeal confirmed this decision too.
The General Court, however, annulled the EUIPO’s decision reminding that in the case at hand both marks are very short signs consisting only of two letters in different order. According to the court in such cases, consumers can make easily a distinction between the marks. What’s more, the signs are dissimilar from a phonetical point of view, and for English speaking consumers they are different from a conceptual perspective too.
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PLANET 