A request for a higher tribunal to reconsider a legal decision in a trademark law case.
A recent decision of the Higher Regional Court Vienna (OLG Vienna), second – and often last – instance in cancellation and revocation proceedings in Austria, showcases the risks of a mismatch between trademark specifications and actual trademark use. We are all aware that EU trademark law allows for trademarks to be registered for a vast…
Since the introduction on 2019 of the filtering mechanism according to which the CJEU has to decide whether or not allow an appeal to proceed in cases that have already been considered twice (such as by the EUIPO’s Board of Appeal and by the General Court), only few appeals have been considered treating issues that…
The EUTM Appellate Court of Alicante has confirmed the pan- European injunction preventing the manufacture and commercialization of unauthorized versions of Ferrari’s one-off models by 3D printing Court decision no. 7/23 of 10 February 2023 of the EUTM Court of Alicante has confirmed the interim measures aimed at preventing the manufacture and commercialization of…
The General Court of the European Union (“GCEU”), annulling the Board of Appeal (“BOA”) decision, found that L’Oreal’s K K WATER mark is not confusingly similar to Heinze’s earlier K mark. It was not disputed that the hair treatment goods covered by L’Oreal’s K K WATER mark in Class 3 (a sub-brand of its leading house…
This is the Kluwer Blog Team wishing all our readers a Happy New Year – and providing the by now traditional yearly review of Luxembourg cases. 2022 was again a busy year for the courts in Luxembourg. The EUIPO Case Law search tool lists 283 decisions in trademark and 13 in designs handed down by…
First it was getting a registration as a trademark for the name of a State (see at https://trademarkblog.kluweriplaw.com/2022/03/28/mission-impossible-register-the-name-of-a-state-as-a-trademark/). Now, it is getting the European Union Court of Justice (CJEU) to review a decision of the General Court (GC) on trademark and design matters arising from the EUIPO Boards of Appeal. As already reported (see at…
The UK finally said bye-bye to the EU, but for how long will UK-based rights still matter in deciding EUTM-related controversies? This is the subject of two recent decisions by the General Court, i.e. the Basmati case, T‑342/20, decided on October 6, 2021, and the subsequent APE TEES case, T‑281/21, decided on March 16, 2022. In…
When deciding whether to opt for the Hague International Design System or go the national route, it is tempting to choose to go with the Hague International Design System for all the conveniences that are involved, namely the streamlined administrative filing process via a single application that can be filed through the national office of…
Inspired by my co-blogger Agnieszka Sztoldman’s August post on Teva’s headache over slogan (EU) trade marks, and the mood-lifting granting of protection to the slogan “STIMMUNG HOCH ZWEI” in Austria (see details below), this is to provide an overview on the protection of slogans and taglines in recent Austrian case law. As any other trademarks,…
In Denmark – as in the EU – it is possible to overcome an absolute ground for refusal based on non-distinctive character of the mark applied for if the applicant is able to provide proof that the mark applied for has acquired distinctive character through use prior to the application date, see Article 7(3) EUTMR…
