Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark M PAY - Earlier Community and national word marks MPAY24 - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009).

Judgment of the General Court (Fourth Chamber) of 7 July 2010 – mPAY24 v OHIM – Ultra (M PAY) (Case T-557/08) Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community figurative mark M PAY – Earlier Community and national word marks MPAY24 – Likelihood of confusion – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community 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 (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 36, 39, 42-45) Re: ACTION brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 30 September 2008 (Case R 221/2007‑1) relating to opposition proceedings between mPAY24 GmbH and Ultra d.o.o. Proizvodnja elektronskih naprav. Information relating to the case Applicant for the Community trade mark: Ultra d.o.o. Proizvodnja elektronskih naprav Community trade mark sought: Figurative mark MPAY for goods and services in Classes 9, 35 to 38 and 42 – Application No 3587896 Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: mPAY24 GmbH Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community trade mark registration No 2061656 of the word mark MPAY24 for goods and services in Classes 9, 16, 35, 36 and 38; Austrian trade mark registration No 200373 of the word mark MPAY24 for goods and services in Classes 9, 16, 35, 36 and 38 Decision of the Opposition Division: Trade mark application dismissed in its entirety Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed in part Operative part The Court: 1. Annuls the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 30 September 2008 (Case R 221/2007‑1) in so far as that decision dismissed the opposition brought by mPAY24 GmbH; 2. Orders OHIM to pay the costs.