Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 15 March 2007 – T.I.M.E. ART v OHIM

(Case C‑171/06 P)

Appeal – Community trade mark – Regulation (EC) No 40/94 − Article 8(1)(b) − Figurative mark − Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier national trade mark – Likelihood of confusion

1. Appeals – Pleas in law – Plea submitted for the first time in the context of the appeal – Inadmissible (see paras 22-24)

2. Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an identical or similar earlier mark registered for identical or similar goods or services (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 33-41)

3. Appeals – Pleas in law – Mistaken assessment of the facts – Inadmissibility – Review by the Court of the assessment of the evidence – Possible only where the clear sense of the evidence has been distorted (Art. 225(1) EC; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 58, first para.) (see para. 51)

Re:

Operative part

The appeal is dismissed.

T.I.M.E. ART Uluslararasi Saat Ticareti ve diş Ticaret AŞ is ordered to pay the costs.