INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW II: TRADE MARKS and PATENTS (LAW339)

NOTES FOR WEEK 2

ABSOLUTE GROUNDS FOR REFUSAL
READING:

Textbook:
Bently & Sherman’s Intellectual Property Law (OUP, 2014) Chapter 37

Relevant statutes:
 UK Trade Marks Act 1994 (as amended by The Trade Marks Regulations 2018)
 The Trade Marks (Amendment etc) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019
 Directive 2008/95/EC to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade
marks, codifying Directive 89/104/EC as amended (Directive 2008/95/EC is repealed
with effect from 15 January 2019, but will be mentioned in the case law)
 Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade
mark (codified version) (repealed by Regulation 2017/1001
 Directive (EU) 2015/2436 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16
December 2015 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks,
OJ L 336, 23.12.2015, p. 1–26
 Regulation (EU) 2015/2424 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16
December 2015 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 on the Community
trade mark and Commission Regulation (EC) No 2868/95 implementing Council
Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Community trade mark, and repealing Commission
Regulation (EC) No 2869/95 on the fees payable to the Office for Harmonization in
the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), OJ L 341, 24.12.2015, p. 21–94
(entering into force 90 days after publication, i.e., 23 March 2016, but with a
considerable number of provisions entering into force on 1 October 2017, see Art. 4
of the Regulation) (Repealed by Regulation 2017/1001)
 Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June
2017 on the European Union trade mark (Text with EEA relevance. )
 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/58
7937/Manual-of-trade-marks-practice.pdf

Additional reading:

-Jones, J., Can't get a break, can't have a Kit Kat: Court of Appeal rejects acquired
distinctiveness for Kit Kat shape, E.I.P.R. 2017, 39(12), 783-786
-Butryi, O., Shaping a colour, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2017, Vol. 12,
No. 12, 997-1003;
-Davis J., “Locating the Average Consumer: His Judicial Origins, Intellectual
Influences and Current Role in European Trade Mark Law” [2005] IPQ 183-221
-Phillips J., “Trade Mark Law and the Need to Keep Free” [2005] IIC 389

Case Law
1
Case-283/01 Shield Mark v Joost Kist [2003] ECR I-14313
Case C-273/00 Sieckmann [2002] ECR I-11737
Case C-321/03 Dyson [2007] ECR I-687
Case-283/01 Shield Mark [2003] ECR I-14313
Case C-104/01 Libertel [2005] 2 CMLR (45) 1097
Case C-49/02 Heidelberger [2004] ECR I-6129
TyNant Spring Waters’ Trade Mark Application [2000] RPC 55
Nestle v Cadbury [2013] EWCA Civ 1174
John Lewis of Hungerford Ltd's Trade Mark Application [2001] RPC 575
Case C-342/97 Lloyd Schuhfabrik Meyer (1999)
West v. Fuller Smith & Turner [2003] FSR 816
Case C-329/2 P SAT.1 v. OHIM (SAT.2) [2004] ECR I-8317
Case C-265/00 Campina Melkunie (BIOMILD) [2004] ECR I-1699
British Sugar [1996] RPC 281
Case T-305/02 Nestle v. OHIM [2003] ECR II-5207
C-404/02 Nichols [2004] ECR I-8499
T-316/00 Viking v. OHIM (2002) II 3715
Cases C-468/01 P- C-472/01 P and C-473 and 474/01 Procter & Gamble [2004] ECR I-1514
C353/03 Nestle v Mars [2005] I-6149
Case C-398/08P Audi v OHIM [2010] ECR I-535
Case C-498/01 P OHIM v. Zapf Creation [2004] ECR 1- 11349
Case 7/10 Diagnostiko v OHIM (17 May 2011)
Quaker Oats v. Safeway (2001) BL:O/254/01
FROOT LOOPS (1998) RPC 240
Case C-363/99 Koninklijke KPN Nederland [2004] I-01619
Case C191/01P - Wrigley ECR I -12447
Windsurfing Chiemsee Cases C-108/97 and C-109/97 [1999] ECR I-2779
Case T-379/03 Peek & Cloppenburg [2005] ECR II-4633
Wm Wrigley Jr. (LIGHT GREEN) [1999] ETMR 214
National Open College Network[2015] EWHC 2667
Case T-16/02 Audi v. OHIM [2003] ECR II-5167
Re Ghazilian’s Trade Mark [2001] RPC 654
Case C-259/04 Emanuel v Continental Shelf 128 [2008] ECR I-3089
Harrison v Teton Valley Trading (CHINA WHITE) [2004] 1 WLR 2577
MICKEY DEES (NIGHTCLUB) Trademark [1998] RPC 359
Gromax v. Don &Low N [1999] RPC 367
Case C-529/07 Chocoladefabriken Lindt & Sprüngli v Franz Hauswirth [2009] E.T.M.R. 56
Old law for shapes: Coca-Cola Trade Marks [1986] R.P.C. 421
Reckitt & Colman Products Limited v Borden Inc. & Ors [1990] R.P.C. 341
New law for shapes: Benetton v G-Star, C-371/06 [2008] ETMR (5) 104
Philips Electronics BV v Remington Consumer Products [1998] R.P.C. 283
Philips Electronics NV v Remington Consumer Products Ltd [1999] R.P.C. 809
Koninklijke Philips Electronics v Remington, C-299/99 [2002] ECR I-5475
Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV v Remington [2006] EWCA Civ 16, [2006] E.T.M.R. 42
The Procter & Gamble v OHIM (Trade Marks and Designs), Case T-122/99
Société des Produits Nestlé SA v Unilever Plc (Cases Ch 2001 App/0731; Ch 2002
App/0049) [2002] EWHC 2709 (Ch); [2003] E.T.M.R. 53
Bongrain SA's Trade Mark Application [2004] EWCA Civ 1690; [2005] E.T.M.R. 47

2
Société des Produits Nestlé v Cadbury [2014] EWHC 16 (Ch)
Apple v DPMA, C-421/13 (2014) ECLI:EU:C:2014:2070
Société de Produits Nestlé SA v Cadbury UK Ltd Case C-215/14 ECLI:EU:C:2015:604
Devin AD v EUIPO Case T-122/17 ECLI:EU:T:2018:719
Deutsches Patent- und Markenamt , C-541/18 ECLI:EU:C:2019:725
Hartwall C-578/17 ECLI:EU:C:2019:261
Portugal Ramos Vinhos , C-629/17 ECLI:EU:C:2018:988
Société des produits Nestlé SA v Mondelez UK Holdings & Services Ltd, formerly Cadbury Holdings
Ltd, Joined Cases C-84/17 P, C-85/17 P and C-95/17 P ECLI:EU:C:2018:596

Sky v SkyKick (C-371/18) ECLI:EU:C:2020:45

Section 3: Absolute grounds for refusal of registration.

Section 3 (1)
The following shall not be registered—
(a)signs which do not satisfy the requirements of section 1(1),

(b)trade marks which are devoid of any distinctive character,

(c)trade marks which consist exclusively of signs or indications which may serve, in
trade, to designate the kind, quality, quantity, intended purpose, value, geographical
origin, the time of production of goods or of rendering of services, or other
characteristics of goods or services,

(d)trade marks which consist exclusively of signs or indications which have become
customary in the current language or in thebona fide and established practices of the
trade:

Provided that, a trade mark shall not be refused registration by virtue of paragraph (b),
(c) or (d) above if, before the date of application for registration, it has in fact acquired a
distinctive character as a result of the use made of it.

Section 3 (2)
A sign shall not be registered as a trade mark if it consists exclusively of—

(a)the shape which results from the nature of the goods themselves,

(b)the shape of goods which is necessary to obtain a technical result, or

(c)the shape which gives substantial value to the goods.

Section 3 (3)
3
A trade mark shall not be registered if it is—

(a)contrary to public policy or to accepted principles of morality, or

(b)of such a nature as to deceive the public (for instance as to the nature, quality or
geographical origin of the goods or service).

Section 3 (4)
A trade mark shall not be registered if or to the extent that its use is prohibited in the
United Kingdom by any enactment or rule of law or by any provision of [F1EU] law.

Section 3 (5)
A trade mark shall not be registered in the cases specified, or referred to, in section 4
(specially protected emblems).

Section 3 (6)
A trade mark shall not be registered if or to the extent that the application is made in
bad faith.