Mundipharma AG v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-256/04)

Judgment of 13 Feb 2007

law://eu/cjeu/2004/t-256-04/para_57@2026-11-14

57Third, as to the conceptual similarity, the Court notes first that, although the average consumer normally perceives a mark as a whole and does not proceed to analyse its various details (Lloyd Schuhfabrik Meyer, paragraph 25), the fact remains that, when perceiving a verbal sign, he will break it down into elements which, for him, suggest a concrete meaning or which resemble words known to him (Case T-356/02 Vitakraft-Werke Wührmann v OHIM — Krafft (VITAKRAFT) [2004] ECR II-3445, paragraph 51). Accordingly, the applicants argument that the opposing marks will not be broken down by consumers cannot be accepted outright, without an examination of the specific circumstances of the case.

Mundipharma AG v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-256/04)

Key facts

History · 1 version

Connections