BUS vs./ ONLINE BUS
The Court of First Instance confirms Board of Appeal decision as to the use of a trademark in a different form than the registration.
In his decision dated November 24, 2005, the President of the Fourth Chamber of the CFI considered, as did
the OHIM examiner, that : 
was acceptable for establishing the use of Community Trademark registration : 
Thus, the opposition lodged by GfK AG against CTM application for ONLINE BUS filed by the company BUS-Betreuungs- und Unternehmensberatungs GmbH, was according to the CFI, rightly justified insofar as the distinctive element of the colliding marks is exclusively constituted by the word BUS. CRISTAL vs./ CRISTAL CASTELLBLANCH 
In their reply to the opposition filed by Champagne Louis Roederer SA, Castellblanch SA contested the validity of the evidence of use submitted for CTM registration CRISTAL, on the ground that the trademark appeared as combined with several other signs.
In their reply to the opposition filed by Champagne Louis Roederer SA, Castellblanch SA contested the validity of the evidence of use submitted for CTM registration CRISTAL, on the ground that the trademark appeared as combined with several other signs.The CFI did not share that point of view and confirmed the Board of Appeal decision according to which there is no isolation requirement regarding the use of the trademark.