Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 6 April 2017.Policolor SA v European Union Intellectual Property Office.EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark Policolor — Earlier EU figurative mark ProfiColor — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Obligation to state reasons — Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009.Case T-178/16.

Judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 6 April 2017 —Policolor v EUIPO — CWS-Lackfabrik Conrad W. Schmidt (Policolor)

(Case T‑178/16)

(EU trade mark — Opposition proceedings — Application for the EU figurative mark Policolor — Earlier EU figurative mark ProfiColor — Relative ground for refusal — Likelihood of confusion — Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 — Obligation to state reasons — Article 75 of Regulation No 207/2009)

1. EU trade mark—Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark—Relative grounds for refusal—Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services—Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark—Criteria for assessment

(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see paras 26, 27, 60)

2. EU trade mark—Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark—Relative grounds for refusal—Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services—Similarity of the marks concerned—Criteria for assessment

(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see paras 30, 43, 44)

3. EU trade mark—Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark—Relative grounds for refusal—Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services—Similarity of the marks concerned—Elements of a trade mark having a descriptive character

(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see para. 37)

4. EU trade mark—Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark—Relative grounds for refusal—Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services—Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark—Figurative marks Policolor and ProfiColor

(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see paras 39, 40, 57, 58, 65)

5. EU trade mark—Decisions of the Office—Legality—Examination by the EU judicature—Criteria

(Council Regulation No 207/2009)

(see para. 55)

6. EU trade mark—Definition and acquisition of the EU trade mark—Relative grounds for refusal—Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services—Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark—Criteria for assessment—Coexistence of two marks on a given market

(Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b))

(see paras 66, 67)

7. EU trade mark—Procedural provisions—Statement of reasons for decisions—Article 75, first sentence, of Regulation No 207/2009—Scope identical to that of Article 296 TFEU

(Art. 296 TFEU; Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 75, first sentence)

(see paras 72-74)

Re:

ACTION brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 29 January 2016 (Case R 346/2015-1), relating to opposition proceedings between CWS-Lackfabrik Conrad W. Schmidt and Policolor.

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Policolor SA to pay the costs.