«(Community trade mark – Opposition procedure – Earlier figurative and word marks containing the word GIORGI – Application for Community word mark GIORGIO BEVERLY HILLS – Relative ground for refusal – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94)»

Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the owner of an identical or similar earlier mark registered for identical or similar products or services – Risk of confusion with the earlier mark – Word mark GIORGIO BEVERLY HILLS and figurative marks including the word GIORGI (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) There is no risk of the Spanish public being confused between the word mark GEORGIO BEVERLEY HILLS, for which registration as a Community trade mark is sought in respect of toilet soaps, perfumes etc. falling within class 3 of the Nice Agreement, and figurative marks including the word signs J GIORGI, GIORGI LINE and MISS GIORGI, previously registered in Spain to designate perfumes and cosmetics in the same class. Even though there is identity or similarity between the goods covered by the conflicting marks, the visual, aural and conceptual differences between the signs constitute sufficient grounds for discounting the existence of that risk, so that one of the conditions for applying Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 40/94 on the Community trade mark is not satisfied.see paras 52, 54

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE (Fourth Chamber) 9 July 2003 (1)

((Community trade mark – Opposition procedure – Earlier figurative and word marks containing the word GIORGI – Application for Community word mark GIORGIO BEVERLY HILLS – Relative ground for refusal – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94))

In Case T-162/01,

applicant,

v

defendant, the other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) being:

ACTION brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 30 April 2001 (Case R 122/2000-1),

THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (Fourth Chamber),

composed of: V. Tiili, President, P. Mengozzi and M. Vilaras, Judges,

Registrar: B. Pastor, Deputy Registrar

having regard to the written procedure and further to the hearing on 22 January 2003,

gives the following

Arguments of the parties

Findings of the Court

On those grounds,

THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE (Fourth Chamber),

hereby:

Tiili

Mengozzi

Vilaras

Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 9 July 2003.

H. Jung

V. Tilli

Registrar

President