The result of a factual assessment.

GvEA, 24 September 2008, T-179/07, Anvil Knitwear, Inc. tegen OHIM / Aprile e Aprile Srl ( Nederlandse versie nog niet beschikbaar).

Gemeenschapsmerk. Oppositieprocedure op grond van ouder national merk ANVIL tegen  gemeenschapsbeeldmerkaanvraag APRILE. Oppositie afgewezen. Niet-betwisting beïnvloedt de vaststelling niet.

“74 In so far as this plea is to be understood as meaning that the Board of Appeal should have found that the similarity between the marks at issue asserted by the applicant had been proved, since Aprile e Aprile had not disputed it, it must be rejected.

75. Such a line of argument misconstrues the meaning of Article 74 of Regulation No 40/94. As is apparent from the considerations and the case-law set out in paragraphs 70 to 72 above, while that provision precludes OHIM, in proceedings relating to relative grounds for refusal, from taking into consideration facts which were not put forward by the parties, with the exception of facts which are well known, it does not prevent it, on the basis of its assessment of the facts actually put forward by one of the parties, from arriving at a conclusion which is different from that desired by the party in question.

76 . The existence or lack of similarity between two marks in opposition does not, as such, constitute a fact within the meaning of Article 74(1) of Regulation No 40/94, but the result of a factual assessment.”

Lees het arrest hier.