ECLI:EU:T:2004:208

Case T-117/02 Grupo El Prado Cervera, SL v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community word mark ‘CHUFAFIT’ – Earlier national word and figurative marks ‘CHUFI’ – Likelihood of confusion – Likelihood of association – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94) Judgment of the Court of First Instance (First Chamber), 6 July 2004 Summary of the Judgment 1.     Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the holder of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Complex mark containing an element descriptive of the goods covered – Target public’s perception of that element as such and not as an element enabling the commercial origin of the goods to be distinguished (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) 2.     Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the holder of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark – Word mark ‘CHUFAFIT’ and verbal and figurative marks containing the word ‘CHUFI’ (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) 1.     In assessing the likelihood of confusion for the purposes of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94 on the Community trade mark, account must be taken of the fact that the target public will not generally consider a descriptive element of the goods designated by a complex mark as the distinctive and dominant element of the overall impression conveyed by that mark enabling the commercial origin of the goods covered to be distinguished. (see paras 51, 53) 2.     For the Spanish public there is no likelihood of confusion between, on the one hand, the word sign CHUFAFIT, registration of which as a Community trade mark is sought for ‘processed nuts’ and ‘fresh nuts’ in Classes 29 and 31 of the Nice Agreement, and, on the other hand, the word mark CHUFI and the figurative mark containing that verbal element registered earlier in Spain to designate a range of goods in the same classes of the Nice Agreement since, even if the goods covered by the competing signs are identical, the visual and phonetic differences between those signs are sufficient to rule out the existence of that likelihood, so that one of the conditions for the application of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94 is not satisfied. (see paras 54, 60) JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE (First Chamber)6 July 2004(1) (Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community word mark ‘CHUFAFIT’ – Earlier national word and figurative marks ‘CHUFI’ – Likelihood of confusion – Likelihood of association – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94) applicant, v defendant, THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (First Chamber), gives the following On those grounds, THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE (First Chamber) Vesterdorf Mengozzi Martins Ribeiro H. Jung B. Vesterdorf Registrar President 1 – Language of the case: German.