header-logo header-logo

17 May 2013
Issue: 7560 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Trade marks

Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) T-640/11, [2013] All ER (D) 72 (May)
 

It was settled case‑law that for a trade mark to possess distinctive character within the meaning of that provision, it should serve to identify the goods in respect of which registration was applied for as originating from a particular undertaking, and therefore to distinguish those goods from those of other undertakings, in order to enable the consumer who had acquired the goods designated by the mark to choose to acquire them again if it had been a positive experience, or to avoid doing so, if it had been negative. That distinctive character should be assessed, on the one hand, by reference to the goods or services for which registration has been sought and, on the other, by reference to the perception of the relevant public. For a finding that there was no distinctive character, it was sufficient that the semantic content of the word mark in question indicated to the consumer a characteristic

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll