header-logo header-logo

No break for KitKat from European Court of Justice

25 September 2015
Issue: 7669 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

The “four finger” shape of a KitKat is not distinctive enough for it to be registered as a trademark, according to a European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruling.

The ECJ was ruling in Société des Produits Nestlé SA v Cadbury UK Ltd (Case C-215/14), concerning Nestlé’s application to register the shape as a 3D mark in the UK. Nestlé argued that the shape was distinct even without packaging or the word KitKat embossed on the chocolate. Cadbury disagreed.

The ECJ ruled that the shape of the bar on its own was not enough to identify the chocolate bar’s origin and therefore could not be registered as a trademark. The case will now return to the High Court for a final ruling.

Lee Curtis, partner at intellectual property firm HGF, says: “This is a dispute about one company, Nestle, trying to monopolise the shape of a product, a KitKat chocolate bar, and in time stopping others using that shape, most notably in this case Cadbury.

“Taken with the original comments from the high court judge, the ECJ decision would imply that a 90% consumer recognition of the shape of the bar by the British public is not enough to give Nestle that monopoly right.”

Nick Bolter, trademark and copyright partner at Cooley (UK) LLP, says: “It is my view that the exclusion from trademark registration of shapes dictated by function was intended to prevent businesses using trademarks to create monopolies that extend beyond the protection of indicators of origin.”

Issue: 7669 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll