On 5 April 2017, the Court of Justice handed down its judgment in the EUIPO vs. Gilbert Szajner matter (C‑598/14 P), also known as LAGUIOLE – the EUTM that was at issue. The case concerns an opposition based on the French business name Forge de Laguiole. The use and, in principle, protection of the business name…
The GOLDEN BALLS saga continues: after losing in the last round before the Board of Appeal of the EUIPO, Golden Balls Limited has once again taken its case (or cause?) to the General Court in Luxembourg (“GC”) (pending case T‑8/17). For recollection: in 2007, two applications for registration of GOLDEN BALLS as EU trademarks were…
Christmas is upon us! We have no idea where 2016 has gone, but to distract you from the turkey eating season the Kluwer Trademark team thought you could do with a Christmas quiz. Some of it requires knowledge, but not all so don’t worry! And you will be relieved to hear that there is no…
Known to many, there is a recent judgment of the CJEU confirming that, if likelihood of confusion exists in only part of the EU, the EUTM is not infringed in the other part – which must be exempted from an injunction. Less known to most, there is a pending reference to the Court of…
CJEU: reimbursement of legal costs in IP infringement proceedings must not be disproportionate or even insignificant On 28 July 2016, the CJEU ruled in a case concerning the reimbursement of legal costs in a patent infringement action in Belgium (United Video Properties Inc. v. Telenet NV, C‑57/15). It declared that a flat fee reimbursement system,…
Early in the morning of the 24 June 2016 it was announced that, by a slim majority of 51.9% to 48.1% of the participating voters, the decision had been taken for the UK to leave the EU. While not legally binding on the UK government, this decision is politically binding and at this time clearly…
There is no official fee for requesting expedited proceedings. A request must be filed at the same time as filing the notice of appeal together with its statement of grounds or, for respondents, when filing their observations in reply. The request must be submitted in writing, as part of a separate document with detailed reasoning…
The life of a trademark practitioner has three seasons – pre-INTA, INTA, and post-INTA. Similarly to Christmas, every year it appears that the pre-INTA season starts sooner and INTA arrives more quickly (even though this year it was later than in recent years!). The week of the INTA Annual Meeting itself, while incredibly busy, is…
In a judgment of 12 November 2015, the Court annulled the Fourth Board of Appeal’s decision refusing to suspend opposition proceedings, even though the trademark applicant proved that it has filed for revocation of the Romanian mark held against registration of its mark – by the way the baby food mark ALETE, which is very…
On 18 February 2016, the General Court issued its decision in the HARRY’S BAR case (T-711/13 and T-716-13), where, adopting a rather broad brush approach, it held that food and beverage products were similar – at least to a certain degree – to services of provision of food and drink in class 43. Harry’s New…
