Soffass v OHMI-Sodipan (Nicky): ECFI 23 Nov 2005

ECFI Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community figurative mark containing the verbal element -‘NICKY’ – Earlier national figurative marks containing the verbal element – ‘NOKY’ – Rejection of opposition for absence of likelihood of confusion – Annulled by the Board of Appeal – Remittal to the Opposition Division to examine whether the goods are similar and the proof of use – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94.
‘if the signs are completely different it is possible in principle, without examining the goods in question, to take the view that there is no likelihood of confusion’ and ‘if there is even a slight similarity between the two signs the likelihood of confusion must be assessed globally, taking account of all the relevant factors’.


T-396/04, [2005] EUECJ T-396/04, [2006] ETMR 542




Regulation (EC) No 40/94 8(1)(b)

Cited by:

CitedEsure Insurance Ltd v Direct Line Insurance Plc ChD 29-Jun-2007
Both companies sold motor insurance products at a distance and used as logos and symbols either a telephone or a computer mouse, in each case on wheels. Direct line claimed the use of the mouse by esure infringed its own trademarks, and resisted . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Intellectual Property

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.235249