In October 2023, the Danish Supreme Court ruled in a trademark case concerning the trademark “TREK”. In recent years the Danish Supreme Court has rarely dealt with trademark disputes (due to the relatively strict requirements of leave from the Appeals Permission Board to appeal a decision to the Supreme Court), making this case particularly interesting….
In a recent decision (T-726/21), the General Court (“GC”) confirmed that Rolex SA (“Rolex”) could not prevent the Danish fashion brand “Junk de Luxe” (owned by the company PWT A/S) from registering a trademark for their logo depicting a crown. The contested sign was among others filed for goods covering clothing, footwear and headgear in…
A judgment of the General Court demonstrates the controversial and problematic nature of retail services marks. The ALDI/ALDIANO Case The case concerns Aldi, the discount chain. An Aldi entity (in the following “Aldi”) filed an application for the declaration of invalidity against the EUTM ALDIANO, registered for “alcoholic beverages (except beers)” (class 33). Aldi relied…
Readers might recall an earlier article (see here) discussing the positions of the General Court (GC) and the EUIPO’s Boards of Appeal (BoA) regarding (dis)similarity between alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages. By way of a…
On 5 November 2021, the Danish Maritime and Commercial High Court (the Court) issued a ruling between Kejser Sausage ApS (‘Kejser Sausage’) and Keyser KBH ApS among others (‘Keyser’). The case concerned Kejser Sausage’s gourmet hot dog stand in Copenhagen, which used the trademark ‘Kejser Sausage’. Elsewhere in Copenhagen, Keyser used the name ‘Keyser Social’…
The ”Pearl” decision by the Federal Supreme Court (BGH) may not be brand new (15 October 2020), but it is interesting in many respects. This post will deal with the similarity of goods. Facts The plaintiff owns an EUTM, registered in 2009, and a German registration, from 2003, for the word PEARL. Both are protected…
Last year, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) took a decision clarifying the effects of the “Praktiker” decision on trademarks registered for “retail services” without further specifications in class 35 before the date of that judgement’s delivery in 2005. Regarding the background of the case, the German company Burlington Fashion GmbH, well-known for their argyle…
In February this year a dispute between the law firm FOCUS Advokater (“FOCUS Lawyers” in English) and the accounting firm Beierholm was decided by the Danish Maritime and Commercial High Court (BS-40894/2019 SHR). The case concerned the use of the name BEIERHOLM FOKUS which FOCUS Advokater found to be an infringement of their trademark rights…
As we all know, the EUTM Regulation 2017/1001 now requires the applicant to indicate the goods and services for which the protection of the trademark is sought with sufficient clarity and precision to enable the competent authorities and economic operators, on that sole basis, to determine the extent of the protection sought. But what if…
Last month the Dutch District Court of The Hague decided in case C/09/520643 / HA ZA that there is no likelihood of confusion between SINA rice and SITA rice. This is somewhat remarkable considering earlier decisions on similar comparisons between four letter signs in relation to foodstuffs. The reason for denying likelihood of confusion lies…
