Gepubliceerd op donderdag 5 mei 2011
IEF 9615
De weergave van dit artikel is misschien niet optimaal, omdat deze is overgenomen uit onze oudere databank.

Gerecht EU 4 mei 2011, zaak T‑129/09 (Bongrain SA tegen OHIM / Apetito AG)

Gemeenschapsmerk. Oppositieprocedure. Aanvraag voor gemeenschapswoordmerk APETITIO. Ouder nationaal woordmerk APETITO. Relatieve weigeringsgrond. Verwarringsgevaar. Soortgelijkheidheid van goederen.  De soortgelijkheid zit ‘m in de eetbaarheid (r.o. 12: "goods at issue had the same nature, that their purposes were the same, namely to be eaten, that their uses were similar and, lastly, that they were substitutable"). Art. 8 lid 1, sub b, van verordening (EG) nr. 40/94 [thans verordening (EG) nr. 207/2009]. Oppositie toegewezen. Verwarringsgevaar bevestigd.

r.o. 17 According to the applicant, that interpretation implies that the goods covered by its application for registration are not identical to those covered by the earlier mark. A prepared meal is a composition of different foodstuffs. The purpose of a prepared meal is to avoid the preparation and cooking of different kinds of foodstuffs. The applicant also states that, apart from prepared meals for astronauts, prepared meals in liquid form do not exist and that a likelihood of confusion with milk is therefore precluded. Lastly, the applicant observes that producers of milk, cheese and dairy products do not produce prepared meals consisting of, inter alia, meat, sausage, fish, vegetables, potatoes and ingredients in prepared form. The goods therefore also differ in terms of their method of production, with the result that they never come from the same producer. 

Lees het arrest hier (link)