Click the case name for better results:

Harrison v Teton Valley Trading Co; Harrison’s Trade Mark Application (CHINAWHITE): CA 27 Jul 2004

The applicant had been an employee of the objector at their nightclub ‘Chinawhite’ and whose principal attraction was a cocktail of the same name. Employees signed a confidentiality agreement as to the recipe. Having left the employment, the appellant set up a company with a similar name and applied for the mark ‘CHINA WHITE’. The … Continue reading Harrison v Teton Valley Trading Co; Harrison’s Trade Mark Application (CHINAWHITE): CA 27 Jul 2004

Interflora And Others v Marks and Spencer plc, Flowers Direct Online Limited: ECJ 22 Sep 2011

ECJ Trade marks – Keyword advertising on the internet – Selection by the advertiser of a keyword corresponding to a competitor’s trade mark with a reputation – Directive 89/104/EEC – Article 5(1)(a) and (2) – Regulation (EC) No 40/94 – Article 9(1)(a) and (c) – Condition that one of the trade mark’s functions be adversely … Continue reading Interflora And Others v Marks and Spencer plc, Flowers Direct Online Limited: ECJ 22 Sep 2011

Interflora And Others v Marks and Spencer plc, Flowers Direct Online Limited: ECJ 24 Mar 2011

ECJ (Opinion) Trade marks – Keyword advertising corresponding to the trade mark of a competitor of the advertiser – Trade marks with a reputation – Blurring – Tarnishment – Free-riding – Directive 89/104 – Article 5(2) – Regulation No 40/94 – Article 9(1)(c). Jaaskinen AG C-323/09, [2011] EUECJ C-323/09 Bailii Directive 89/104 European Citing: Reference … Continue reading Interflora And Others v Marks and Spencer plc, Flowers Direct Online Limited: ECJ 24 Mar 2011

Interflora Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc: CA 5 Nov 2014

Interflora complaned that the defendant, in order to advertise its flower delivery service, had paid a third party search engine, usin the claimant’s trade marks to attract traffic. Held: In such a claim, it was not enough to show use of the mark. A claimant had, in addition, to show that a reasonably informed user … Continue reading Interflora Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc: CA 5 Nov 2014

Interflora Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc and Another: ChD 12 Jun 2013

The court considered the form of the injunction requested to give effect to the earlier full judgment in the case brought, requiring the defendant to discontinue any use of the terms complained of as infringing the claimant’s registered marks as internet search terms. Arnold J [2013] EWHC 1484 (Ch) Bailii England and Wales Citing: See … Continue reading Interflora Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc and Another: ChD 12 Jun 2013

Interflora Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc and Another: ChD 15 Apr 2013

The defendant objected to the introduction of certain evidence by the claimant under a Civil Evidence Act notice. Claimants seeking to adduce academic journals as expert evidence Arnold J [2013] EWHC 936 (Ch), [2013] WLR(D) 183 Bailii, WLRD Civil Procedure Rules 35 England and Wales Citing: See Also – Interflora Inc and Another v Marks … Continue reading Interflora Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc and Another: ChD 15 Apr 2013

Interflora Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc and Another: ChD 21 May 2013

Mark use in search engine was infringing use The claimant mark owner alleged that the defendant, in paying a search engine to use the claimants mark as a search keyword was infringing its rights. The defendant argued that the use of the same sign in different contexts could amount to a different and non-infringing use. … Continue reading Interflora Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc and Another: ChD 21 May 2013

Interflora, Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc and Another: ChD 22 May 2009

Each of the parties provided a service delivering flowers. The claimant had a trade mark, and the defendants each purchased the use of that trade mark and variations of it with a search engine (Google) so that a search under the trade mark produced references also to the defendants’ web-sites. The bids for these words … Continue reading Interflora, Inc and Another v Marks and Spencer Plc and Another: ChD 22 May 2009

Re Trade Marks Act 1994 Trade Marks Nos 1338514 (in Class 5) and 1402537 (in Class 3) in the name of Laboratories Goemar SA and Applications for Revocation thereof Nos 10073 and 10074 by La Mer Technology Inc: ChD 20 Jun 2003

A case had been referred to the court as to the interpetation of the articles in the Directive. The court replied asking whether the subsequent Ansul judgement answered the questions raised.
Held: By agreement with the parties, only one of the . .

UK Registered Trade Marks Nos 1338514 (in Class 5) and 1402537 (in Class 3) in the name of Laboratories Goemar SA and Applications for Revocation thereof Nos 10073 and 10074 by La Mer Technology Inc: ChD 19 Dec 2001

The applicants sought revocation of the defendant’s trade marks on the grounds that they had not been implemented after five years. It was sensible to go straight from the Directive, rather than the Act which implemented it. The onus was on the . .

L’Oreal Sa and others v Bellure NV and others: ChD 4 Oct 2006

The claimant alleged that the defendants had been importing copies of their perfumes. The products were not counterfeits, but ‘smell-alikes’. The defendants’ packaging and naming was used to suggest which perfume it resembled. Held: The claimant’s expert survey evidence was defective in several ways, but even so there was no evidence of confusion under the … Continue reading L’Oreal Sa and others v Bellure NV and others: ChD 4 Oct 2006

Regina v Johnstone, etc: CACD 1 Feb 2002

The several defendants appealed convictions for breaches of section 92 of the Act. Held: The section presumed that a civil infringement of the Trade Mark had taken place. Accordingly any of the defences available to a civil action must be available also against a criminal action. Furthermore there was no conflict between the Act and … Continue reading Regina v Johnstone, etc: CACD 1 Feb 2002

Adidas-Salomon AG and Another v Fitnessworld Training Ltd: ECJ 23 Oct 2003

The claimants had trade marks consisting of three parallel lines of contrasting colour to the underlying garment. They alleged infringement by the use of similar designs with two lines by the defendant. The directive allowed member states to elect to allow a proprietor of a mark to prevent third parties from using the sign for … Continue reading Adidas-Salomon AG and Another v Fitnessworld Training Ltd: ECJ 23 Oct 2003

Shield Mark BV v Joost Kist h o d n Memex: ECJ 27 Nov 2003

ECJ Trade marks – Approximation of laws – Directive 89/104/EEC – Article 2 – Signs of which a trade mark may consist – Signs capable of being represented graphically – Sound signs – Musical notation – Written description – Onomatopoeia. Citations: C-283/01, Times 04-Dec-2003, [2003] EUECJ C-283/01 Links: Bailii Statutes: Directive 89/104/EEC European, Intellectual Property … Continue reading Shield Mark BV v Joost Kist h o d n Memex: ECJ 27 Nov 2003

Van Doren + Q GmbH v Lifestyle sports + sportsewar Handelgesellschaft mbH and another: ECJ 8 Apr 2003

The claimant was exclusive agent for the trademark holder for Germany. The defendant sold goods it had not bought from the claimant, but bearing the mark. The defendant alleged exhaustion of the claimant’s rights. Held: The burden of proving exhaustion of rights lay on the defendant, unless he could show that the result would be … Continue reading Van Doren + Q GmbH v Lifestyle sports + sportsewar Handelgesellschaft mbH and another: ECJ 8 Apr 2003

Davidoff et Cle SA and Another v Gofkid Ltd: ECJ 9 Jan 2003

The claimant distributed cosmetics and other goods in Germany under the mark ‘Davidoff’, and the defendants used a similar registered mark for their own and similar goods. They sought protection under the directive. Held: The directive explicitly provided a protection for the user of an earlier mark against the user of a later and similar … Continue reading Davidoff et Cle SA and Another v Gofkid Ltd: ECJ 9 Jan 2003

Arsenal Football Club plc v Reed: ECJ 12 Nov 2002

The trade mark owner sought orders against a street vendor who sold articles using their marks. He asserted that the marks were not attached to show any quality, but were used by the fans as badges of allegiance. Held: The function of a trade mark was to guarantee the identity or origin of the goods, … Continue reading Arsenal Football Club plc v Reed: ECJ 12 Nov 2002

Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV v Remington Consumer Products Ltd: ECJ 18 Jun 2002

The claimant developed a three headed rotary razor for men. They obtained registration of the arrangement as a trade mark. They sued the defendant for infringement, and the defendant countered challenging the validity of the registration, saying the design was functional. Held: A sign consisting exclusively of a product’s shape was unregistrable, if it was … Continue reading Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV v Remington Consumer Products Ltd: ECJ 18 Jun 2002

Boehringer Ingelheim KG and Others v Swingward Ltd and Another: ECJ 23 Apr 2002

The applicant sought to restrict the right of parallel importers of its goods to repackage the goods, and re-supply them in packaging on which their trade mark had been re-applied. Held: The prohibition of quantitative restrictions on imports does not preclude restrictions justified on the grounds of the protection of industrial and commercial property. Such … Continue reading Boehringer Ingelheim KG and Others v Swingward Ltd and Another: ECJ 23 Apr 2002

Zino Davidoff SA v A and G Imports Ltd etc: ECJ 20 Nov 2001

An injunction was sought to prevent retailers marketing in the EEA products which had been obtained outside the EEA for resale within the EEA but outside the controlled distribution system. Held: Silence alone was insufficient to constitute implied consent for the resale within the EEA of goods otherwise than in accordance with a licence from … Continue reading Zino Davidoff SA v A and G Imports Ltd etc: ECJ 20 Nov 2001

Merz and Krell GmbH and Co: ECJ 4 Oct 2001

ECJ Trade marks – Approximation of laws – Article 3(1)(d) of First Directive 89/104/EEC – Grounds for refusal or invalidity – Trade marks which consist exclusively of signs or indications which have become customary in the current language or in the bona fide and established practices of the trade – Need for signs or indications … Continue reading Merz and Krell GmbH and Co: ECJ 4 Oct 2001

Scandecor Developments AB v Scandecor Marketing AV and Others and One Other Action: HL 4 Apr 2001

A business had grown, but the two founders split, and set up separate business. There was no agreement as to the use of the trading names and trade marks. The original law of Trade Marks prohibited bare exclusive licenses, licences excluding the rights of the owner to use the mark, and with no quality control. … Continue reading Scandecor Developments AB v Scandecor Marketing AV and Others and One Other Action: HL 4 Apr 2001

Sebago and Maison Dubois et Fils SA v GB-Unic SA: ECJ 1 Jul 1999

The fact that specific goods bearing a Trade Mark had been authorised for distribution within the EEA, did not mean that the relative trade mark rights had been exhausted. They would only be exhausted where the consent related to each individual item in respect of which the exhaustion was pleaded. National rules providing for exhaustion … Continue reading Sebago and Maison Dubois et Fils SA v GB-Unic SA: ECJ 1 Jul 1999

Silhouette International Schmied GmbH and Co KG v Hartlauer Handelsgesellschaft mbH: ECJ 16 Jul 1998

National Trade Mark rules providing for exhaustion of rights in Trade Marks for goods sold outside area of registration were contrary to the EU first directive on trade marks. A company could prevent sale of ‘grey goods’ within the internal market. Articles 5 to 7 of the directive embody a ‘complete harmonisation’ of the rules … Continue reading Silhouette International Schmied GmbH and Co KG v Hartlauer Handelsgesellschaft mbH: ECJ 16 Jul 1998

Phytheron International v Bourdon: ECJ 20 Mar 1997

ECJ 1 Preliminary rulings – Jurisdiction of the Court – Limits – Presentation during the procedure before the Court of facts which differ from those described in the order for reference – Obligation of the Court to abide by the facts as stated in the order for reference (EC Treaty, Art. 177; EC Statute of … Continue reading Phytheron International v Bourdon: ECJ 20 Mar 1997

Parfums Christian Dior v Evora BV: ECJ 4 Nov 1997

ECJ As a court common to more than one Member State which has the task of ensuring that the legal rules common to the three Benelux States are applied uniformly and reference to which is a step in the proceedings before the national courts leading to definitive interpretations of the common Benelux rules, the Benelux … Continue reading Parfums Christian Dior v Evora BV: ECJ 4 Nov 1997

MPA Pharma v Rhone-Poulenc Pharma GmbH: ECJ 11 Jul 1996

ECJ 1. Although a directive may not of itself impose obligations on an individual and cannot therefore be relied upon as such against him, the national court which applies national law and is required to interpret it must as far as possible do so, whether the provisions in question were adopted before or after the … Continue reading MPA Pharma v Rhone-Poulenc Pharma GmbH: ECJ 11 Jul 1996

Eurim-Pharm Arzneimittel v Beiersdorf and others: ECJ 11 Jul 1996

ECJ 1. Although a directive may not of itself impose obligations on an individual and cannot therefore be relied upon as such against him, the national court which applies national law and is required to interpret it must as far as possible do so, whether the provisions in question were adopted before or after the … Continue reading Eurim-Pharm Arzneimittel v Beiersdorf and others: ECJ 11 Jul 1996

Arsenal Football Club Plc v Reed: ChD 6 Apr 2001

The defendant had sold memorabilia using the claimant’s name, and marks for thirty years. He sought to make it clear that the products were not sourced from the club. They were purchased, generally, by people who wore them as badges of allegiance to the club. The claim of passing off failed because the club had … Continue reading Arsenal Football Club Plc v Reed: ChD 6 Apr 2001

Intel Corporation v Sihra: ChD 2003

The court considered the observations of Pumfrey J in the Chrysler case as requiring proof of real future unfair advantage or detriment and not merely risk, and emphasised both the need for a causal connection between similarity on the one hand and relevant confusion on the other and the need to keep ‘similarity’ and ‘confusion’ … Continue reading Intel Corporation v Sihra: ChD 2003

Windsurfing Chiemsee Produktions and Vertriebs GmbH v Boots und Segelzubehor Walter Huber and another: ECJ 4 May 1999

Registration is to be refused in respect of descriptive marks, ie marks composed exclusively of signs or indications which may serve to designate the characteristics of the categories of goods or services in respect of which registration is applied for. Article 3(1)(c) therefore prevents descriptive signs and indications from being reserved to one undertaking alone … Continue reading Windsurfing Chiemsee Produktions and Vertriebs GmbH v Boots und Segelzubehor Walter Huber and another: ECJ 4 May 1999

Zino Davidoff SA v A and G Imports Ltd: ChD 24 May 1999

Though a company could prevent parallel import within the EU, it could not prevent goods sold outside the EU but without restriction on re-sale, being subsequently re-sold into the EU. The removal of a numbering mark did not materially reduce its quality. Citations: Times 24-May-1999, [1999] RPC 631 Statutes: Trade Mark Council Directive 89/104/EEC Jurisdiction: … Continue reading Zino Davidoff SA v A and G Imports Ltd: ChD 24 May 1999

Martin y Paz Diffusion Sa v David Depuydt: ECJ 19 Sep 2013

Trade marks – Directive 89/104/EEC – Article 5 – Consent on the part of the proprietor of a trade mark to the use, by a third party, of a sign which is identical with that mark – Consent given in a situation where there is shared use – Possibility for that proprietor to put an … Continue reading Martin y Paz Diffusion Sa v David Depuydt: ECJ 19 Sep 2013

Portakabin Ltd, Portakabin BV v Portakabin: ECJ 8 Jul 2010

ECJ Trade marks – Keyword advertising on the internet – Directive 89/104/EEC – Articles 5 to 7 – Display of advertisements on the basis of a keyword identical with a trade mark – Display of advertisements on the basis of keywords reproducing a trade mark with ‘minor spelling mistakes’ – Advertising for second-hand goods – … Continue reading Portakabin Ltd, Portakabin BV v Portakabin: ECJ 8 Jul 2010

Specsavers International Healthcare Ltd and Others v Asda Stores Ltd: ChD 30 Jul 2010

The claimant complained of the defendant’s use of its trade marks alleging infringement and passing off when it relaunched its own optician services. Having had advance notice of the details of the proposed campaign, the claimants had launched their own pre-emptive campaign. They now admitted misuse of the confidential information acquired. Held: The claim succeeded … Continue reading Specsavers International Healthcare Ltd and Others v Asda Stores Ltd: ChD 30 Jul 2010

Linde AG, Winward Industries Inc and Rado Uhren AG: ECJ 8 Apr 2003

Applications for the registration of three dimensional trade marks had been referred to the court on the question of whether they could be refused for lack of distinctiveness. Held: The tests for three dimensional marks were no more strict than for other marks. When looking at the grounds for refusal, the public interest was to … Continue reading Linde AG, Winward Industries Inc and Rado Uhren AG: ECJ 8 Apr 2003

Lloyd Schuhfabrik Meyer v Klijsen Handel: ECJ 22 Jun 1999

ECJ In accordance with the division of functions provided for by Article 177 of the Treaty (now Article 234 EC), the role of the Court of Justice is limited to providing the national court with the guidance on interpretation necessary to resolve the case before it, while it is for the national court to apply … Continue reading Lloyd Schuhfabrik Meyer v Klijsen Handel: ECJ 22 Jun 1999

Sunrider Corporation (T/A Sunrider International) v Vitasoy International Holdings Ltd: ChD 22 Jan 2007

An application had been made to have the trade mark declared invalid. The owner replied saying that the five year period during which a mark might be challenged had expired. Held: The five year period commenced not from the date when the application for registration of the mark was made, but from the date when … Continue reading Sunrider Corporation (T/A Sunrider International) v Vitasoy International Holdings Ltd: ChD 22 Jan 2007

Top Logistics And Others v Bacardi and Company Ltd and Others: ECJ 16 Jul 2015

ECJ Judgment -Reference for a preliminary ruling – Trade marks – Directive 89/104/EEC – Article 5 – Products bearing a trade mark released for free circulation and placed under the duty suspension arrangement without the consent of the proprietor of the trade mark – Right of that proprietor to oppose that placing – Definition of … Continue reading Top Logistics And Others v Bacardi and Company Ltd and Others: ECJ 16 Jul 2015

Daimler Chysler AG v Javid Alavi (t/a Merc): ChD 18 Dec 2000

Where a trader was involved in an activity quite outside any activity which might be undertaken by the holder of the registered trade mark, and there was no real likelihood of confusion, the owner of the mark could not claim that the value of his own mark would be diminished or damaged caused to its … Continue reading Daimler Chysler AG v Javid Alavi (t/a Merc): ChD 18 Dec 2000

Leidseplein Beheer Bv v Red Bull Gmbh: ECJ 6 Feb 2014

ECJ Request for a preliminary ruling – Trade marks – Directive 89/104/EEC – Rights conferred by a trade mark – Trade mark with a reputation – Protection extended to non-similar goods or services – Use by a third party, without due cause, of a sign identical with or similar to the trade mark with a … Continue reading Leidseplein Beheer Bv v Red Bull Gmbh: ECJ 6 Feb 2014

Google France and Google (Intellectual Property): ECJ 23 Mar 2010

ECJ Trade marks Internet Search engine Keyword advertising Display, on the basis of keywords corresponding to trade marks, of links to sites of competitors of the proprietors of those marks or to sites offering imitation goods Directive 89/104/EEC Article 5 Regulation (EC) No 40/94 Article 9 Liability of the search engine operator Directive 2000/31/EC (‘Directive … Continue reading Google France and Google (Intellectual Property): ECJ 23 Mar 2010

Silberquelle GmbH v Maselli-Strickmode GmbH (Approximation of Laws): ECJ 15 Jan 2009

ECJ Trade marks Directive 89/104/EEC Articles 10 and 12 Revocation Concept of ‘genuine use’ of a mark Affixing the mark to promotional items Distribution of such items free of charge to the purchasers of goods sold by the mark’s proprietor. C-495/07, [2009] EUECJ C-495/07, [2009] WLR(D) 6 Bailii, WLRD European, Intellectual Property Leading Case Updated: … Continue reading Silberquelle GmbH v Maselli-Strickmode GmbH (Approximation of Laws): ECJ 15 Jan 2009

Nude Brands Ltd v Stella McCartney Ltd and Others: ChD 20 Aug 2009

The claimant sought an injunction against the defendants to restrain an alleged trade mark infringement in respect of the use of the mark ‘NUDE’ by the proposed product ‘STELLANUDE’. Held: Despite the differences, it was ‘arguable that the sign STELLANUDE is similar to the mark NUDE.’ The case should be allowed to proceed. Floyd J … Continue reading Nude Brands Ltd v Stella McCartney Ltd and Others: ChD 20 Aug 2009

Peak Holding AB v Axolin-Elinor AB (formerly Handelskompaniet Factory Outlet i Loddekopinge AB): ECJ 30 Nov 2004

ECJ (Approximation Of Laws) Trade marks – Directive 89/104/EEC – Article 7(1) – Exhaustion of the rights conferred by a trade mark – Putting on the market of the goods in the EEA by the proprietor of the trade mark – Concept – Goods offered for sale to consumers and then withdrawn – Sale to … Continue reading Peak Holding AB v Axolin-Elinor AB (formerly Handelskompaniet Factory Outlet i Loddekopinge AB): ECJ 30 Nov 2004

Oracle America Inc v M-Tech Data Ltd: SC 27 Jun 2012

The appellant complained that the respondent had imported into the European Economic Area disk drives bearing its trade marks in breach of the appellant’s rights. The respondent had argued that the appellant had abused its position by withholding information which would allow it to trade lawfully. The Court was now asked: ‘whether a person who … Continue reading Oracle America Inc v M-Tech Data Ltd: SC 27 Jun 2012

Levi Strauss and Co and Another v Tesco Stores Ltd and others: ChD 31 Jul 2002

The trade mark owners sought to restrain the defendants from selling within the EU, articles bearing their mark which had been imported other than through their own channels. The defendants resisted summary judgement after reference to the European Court of Justice, on the grounds that the Regulation was invalid as infringing a basic tenet of … Continue reading Levi Strauss and Co and Another v Tesco Stores Ltd and others: ChD 31 Jul 2002

L’Oreal SA, Lancome parfums et beaute and Cie, Laboratoire Garnier and Cie, L’Oreal (UK) Limited v eBay International AG, eBay Europe SARL, eBay (UK) Limited: ECJ 12 Jul 2011

ECJ Grand Chamber – Trade marks – Internet – Offer for sale, on an online marketplace targeted at consumers in the European Union, of trade-marked goods intended, by the proprietor, for sale in third States – Removal of the packaging of the goods – Directive 89/104/EEC – Regulation (EC) No 40/94 – Liability of the … Continue reading L’Oreal SA, Lancome parfums et beaute and Cie, Laboratoire Garnier and Cie, L’Oreal (UK) Limited v eBay International AG, eBay Europe SARL, eBay (UK) Limited: ECJ 12 Jul 2011

L’Oreal SA, Lancome parfums et beaute and Cie, Laboratoires Garnier and Cie v Bellure NV, Malaika Investments Ltd, Starion International Ltd: ECJ 18 Jun 2009

loreal_bellureECJ2009 ECJ Approximation of laws – Trade marks Directive 98/104/EEC Article 5(1)(a) – Use of another person’s trade mark for identical goods in comparative advertising Article 5(2) – Unfair advantage taken of the reputation of a trade mark – Comparative advertising Directives 84/450/EEC and 97/55/EEC Article 3a(1) – Conditions under which comparative advertising is permitted … Continue reading L’Oreal SA, Lancome parfums et beaute and Cie, Laboratoires Garnier and Cie v Bellure NV, Malaika Investments Ltd, Starion International Ltd: ECJ 18 Jun 2009

Starbucks (HK) Ltd and Another v British Sky Broadcasting Group Plc and Others: SC 13 May 2015

The court was asked whether, as the appellants contended, a claimant who is seeking to maintain an action in passing off need only establish a reputation among a significant section of the public within the jurisdiction, or whether, as the courts below held, such a claimant must also establish a business with customers within the … Continue reading Starbucks (HK) Ltd and Another v British Sky Broadcasting Group Plc and Others: SC 13 May 2015

Canon Kabushiki Kaisha v Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer: ECJ 29 Sep 1998

In a complaint of trade mark infringement, and when comparing the mark and sign, a lesser degree of similarity between the marks may be offset by a greater degree of similarity between the goods/services and vice versa.
Europa Directive 89/104/EEC Trade marks Article 4(4)(a) Trade marks with a reputation – Protection against the use of a later identical or similar mark Use which takes or would take unfair advantage of, or is or . .

L’Oreal SA, Lancome parfums et beaute and Cie, Laboratoire Garnier and Cie, L’Oreal (UK) Limited v eBay International AG, eBay Europe SARL, eBay (UK) Limited: ECJ 9 Dec 2010

ECJ Opinion – Information society – Search engine – Keyword advertising – Operator of electronic marketplace – Keywords corresponding to trade marks – Directive 89/104/EEC (‘Trade Mark directive’) – Articles 5 . .