header-logo header-logo

04 July 2014
Issue: 7613 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Trade marks

Kampol sp. z o.o. v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade marks and designs) T-382/12, [2014] All ER (D) 08 (Jul)

The proceedings concerned the registration of a trade mark, which was opposed on the basis of Art 8(1)(a) and (b) of Council Regulation (EC) 207/2009 (on the Community trade mark). The Court ruled that under Art 8(1)(b) of the Regulation, the mark applied for should not be registered if there existed a likelihood of confusion “on the part of the public in the territory in which the earlier trade mark was protected”. Further, the assessment of the likelihood of confusion should be taken in relation to the average consumer and the types of goods in question.

 

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers drives further growth in its UK immigration team with new partner Sophie Barrett-Brown

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal invests in next generation of legal talent as specialist litigation practice grows

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips continues momentum in London with arrival of Catrina Smith

NEWS
Restrictions on workplace non-disclosure agreements could make settlements slower, more complex and more expensive when reforms expected in 2027 take effect
Private prosecutors face closer scrutiny under Crown Prosecution Service guidance designed to strengthen accountability and consistency when intervention is requested
Foreign states cannot necessarily claim immunity for cyber operations launched abroad against computers in Britain, following a divided Supreme Court ruling
Defendants who make unsupported complaints about their lawyers risk losing legal aid while confiscation proceedings continue without representation
Lawyers advising Russian clients face different sanctions restrictions across the UK, EU and US, despite their shared objective of increasing pressure on Russia
back-to-top-scroll