The Case

European Community Trade marks. When determining whether goods were similar for the purposes of an objection to the registration of a Community trade mark under art8(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) 40-94, it was clear that some consumers might perceive a close connection between clothing, footwear and headgear in class 25 of the Nice agreement and certain goods in class 18 (leather, imitations of leather, and goods made from those materials and not included in other classes) that were clothing accessories. Consequently, they might be led to believe that the same undertaking was responsible for the production of those goods. The fact that the goods were often sold in the same specialist sales outlets was likely to facilitate the perception by the consumer of the close connections between them. In all the circumstances, the goods in question demonstrated a degree of similarity contrary to the findings of the Board of Appeal.