European trademark registration: likelihood of confusion between EU trademarks
 rejected and EU trademark due...)
Recently Opposition Division of European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) rejected and EU trademark due to the likelihood of confusion with Irish mark. It is believed that there exists a likelihood of confusion between marks if in the eyes of consumer there is a similarity either visual, aural or conceptual meanings of trademarks in question and they are registered for similar goods and/or services. If there exists a possibility that either specific similarities or overall impression may cause associations between marks in the eyes of consumer, the registration of the later trademark may be rejected in its eternity.
The Opposition Division compared the two marks below - Irish trademark TRINITY and EU trademark (figurative) TRINITY HOTELS:
TRINITY (earlier trademark)
vs.
(opposed trademark)
The Opposition Division held that both marks are registered for identical goods and services.
Visually both compared trademarks are similar due to the fact that the word “TRINITY” is the whole earlier trademark and is the most significant and dominant part of the opposed trademark in the European Union. The word “hotels” is only additional element as well as the figurative element of the mark. Nevertheless, in the eyes of consumers the similarity will be in high level as the main element of the marks “TRINITY” is identical for both trademarks.
The same conclusions were made in aural and conceptual comparison - as the main element of the marks is identical, the level of similarity is considered to be high. In addition, it was underlined that the earlier mark already has a high level of distinction in the eyes of relevant public.
Consequently, there exists a possibility of likelihood of confusion in the eyes of consumer. Therefore, the disputed European trademark registration was rejected in its eternity.
When comparing the similarities between marks it was important to determine that the earlier trademark is a word trademark without any special requirements for resembling the mark. The opposed EU trademark on the other hand was a figurative mark that consists of two words “trinity” and “hotels” as well as figurative three sided element. Nevertheless, it was concluded that the word elements are the most significant also in the opposed trademark. The word “TRINITY”, which is the only part or the main part of both trademarks has a meaning - a group of three.
Visually both compared trademarks are similar due to the fact that the word “TRINITY” is the whole earlier trademark and is the most significant and dominant part of the opposed trademark in the European Union. The word “hotels” is only additional element as well as the figurative element of the mark. Nevertheless, in the eyes of consumers the similarity will be in high level as the main element of the marks “TRINITY” is identical for both trademarks.
The same conclusions were made in aural and conceptual comparison - as the main element of the marks is identical, the level of similarity is considered to be high. In addition, it was underlined that the earlier mark already has a high level of distinction in the eyes of relevant public.
Consequently, there exists a possibility of likelihood of confusion in the eyes of consumer. Therefore, the disputed European trademark registration was rejected in its eternity.
To find out more about European trademark registration or opposition against EU trademarks, please contact our English-speaking lawyers at info@gencs.eu.
T: +371 67 240 090
F: +371 67 240 091