Gepubliceerd op woensdag 4 maart 2009
IEF 7627
De weergave van dit artikel is misschien niet optimaal, omdat deze is overgenomen uit onze oudere databank.

Professioneel Tennis Register

GvEA, 4 maart 2009, zaak T-168/07, Professional Tennis Registry, Inc. tegen OHIM / Registro Profesional de Tenis, SL (Nederlandse versie nog niet beschikbaar).

Gemeenschapsmerken. Oppositieprocedure op grond van oudere nationaal en gemeenschapsbeeldmerk RPT Registro Profesional de Tenis, S.L. tegen aanvraag beeldmerk PTR PROFESSIONAL TENNIS REGISTRY. Gerecht vernietigt de beslissing van het OHIM en wijst de oppositie alsnog af. Geen gevaar voor verwarring.

43. With regard to the overall assessment of the likelihood of confusion between the signs in question, those signs have important visual and phonetic differences. In the present case, the view must be taken that those visual and phonetic differences, established in paragraphs 30 to 34 and 36 to 38 above, clearly cancel out their conceptual similarity (see, to that effect, Case T-3/04 Simonds Farsons Cisk v OHIM – Spa Monopole (KINJI by SPA) 2005 ECR II-4837, paragraph 55). It follows that, notwithstanding the identity or similarity of the goods concerned, the differences existing in this case between the conflicting marks are such that there is no likelihood that the relevant public will be led to believe that the goods covered by the figurative mark PTR Professional Tennis Registry come from the undertaking which holds the earlier marks RPT Registro Profesional de Tenis S.L. and RPT European Registry of Professional Tennis, or from an undertaking economically linked to that undertaking.

Lees het arrest hier.