Related insights: Brand Protection
Brexit and beyond: trade mark protection strategies in an uncertain global marketplace
30 Jul 2020
Brexit planning for your trade mark portfolio needs to be back on the agenda – particularly after the delays caused by coronavirus – to get the most cost-benefit out of the current regime, before the end of the transitional period.
More for your money – cost savings on UK/EU trade mark protection
10 Jul 2020
In the current climate, we understand that businesses are looking to make cost savings while maximising the return on their spend. Here are some simple measures that organisations should explore to make the most of their funds when it comes to trade mark management in the United Kingdom and European Union.
Flying on Red Bull's wings
09 Jun 2020
In a recent case involving the globally-renowned energy drinks manufacturer, the High Court held that a director (who acted mainly as a litigant in person) was jointly liable for acts of trade mark infringement committed by the company.
Coronavirus-related trade mark filings will face registration hurdles
12 May 2020
The COVID-19 pandemic and resulting economic shutdown has impacted the daily lives of nearly every person on the planet. So it isn’t surprising that trade mark offices across the globe have seen a number of filings to protect terms relating to 'COVID' and 'coronavirus'.
Sky is (almost) the limit for brand owners
29 Apr 2020
Following a reference from the High Court of Justice in England & Wales ("High Court"), the Court of Justice of the European Union ("CJEU") has confirmed that a lack of clarity and precision in the terms used to designate the goods and services is not an independent ground for declaring a trade mark registration to be invalid. Whilst the CJEU ruling has been criticised subsequently for avoiding some of the key issues, it did rule that an application made without any intention to use that trade mark in relation to the goods and services specified, can constitute bad faith.
AMS Neve v Heritage Audio: option to choose court 'sounds' great for trade mark owners
14 Apr 2020
The Court of Justice of the European Union ("CJEU") has confirmed that when a seller of goods, who is established in one Member State, sells infringing goods bearing an European Union ("EU") trade mark specifically targeting customers in another Member State, the action can be brought under Article 97(5) of the European Trade Mark Regulation No 207/2009 (the "Regulation"), relating to the international jurisdiction provisions, in the court of the Member State in which the targeted customers reside.
Non-traditional marks – still struggling with registration
03 Feb 2020
For nearly 30 years, more than just word marks have been capable of registration across the European Union (EU). The relevant statutory provision in the UK as to what can constitute a trade mark (at the relevant time) was section 1(1)(a) of the Trade Marks Act 1994 (the TMA).
And the award goes to…IPEC decides 'quality over quantity' is key for confusion evidence in passing off
22 Jul 2019
The UK-based organiser of the "Asian Achievers Awards" has been successful in its claim for passing off against a competitor branding its event under the name "British Asian Achievers Awards", despite only being able to adduce one instance of actual confusion upon which the court was prepared to rely.
Debranding can constitute trade mark use
05 Jul 2019
In Mitsubishi Shoji Kaisha Ltd & Or v Duma Forklifts NV & Or, the CJEU ruled in favour of trade mark proprietors being allowed to oppose the action of third parties from marketing the proprietor's goods for the first time within the European Economic Area after first removing the proprietor's signs, modifying the product and then reaffixing their own signs.
easyAppeal: Court determines targeting and service outside the jurisdiction in easyGroup v Easy Fly
21 Jun 2019
In a trade mark infringement claim involving easyGroup and Easy Fly, easyGroup appealed the Court's earlier decision which set aside an order for service outside the jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales, pursuant to an application made by Easy Fly. The decision hinged on whether Easy Fly had targeted UK consumers. The judge, considering various factors that could indicate targeting, found that Easy Fly had not targeted UK consumers, and therefore easyGroup's appeal was dismissed.
Insights
Stay informed
