Anheuser-Busch Inc v Budejovicky Budvar Narodni Podnik; Budejovicky Budvar Narodni Podnik v Anheuser Busch Inc: ChD 20 May 1998

It is possible to grant two identical trade marks in respect of beer where either there was no confusion, or an honest concurrent use could justify such double registrations.


Times 20-May-1998


Trade Marks Act 1994 11 12(2)

Cited by:

Appeal fromAnheuser-Busch Inc v Budejovicky Bodvar Narodni Podnik; Budejovicky Bodvar Narodni Podnik v Anheuser-Busch CA 7-Feb-2000
The registration of two trade marks (‘Budweiser’) with the identical names was against the Act since it would appear to encourage the very confusion the Act sought to avoid. Nevertheless, where there was genuine honest concurrent use, that use might . .
See AlsoPodnik v Anheuser-Busch Inc CA 29-Oct-2002
. .
See AlsoAnheuser-Busch v Budejovicky Budvar, narodni podnik ECJ 16-Nov-2004
Agreement establishing the World Trade Organisation – Articles 2(1), 16(1) and 70 of the TRIPs Agreement – Trade marks – Scope of the proprietor’s exclusive right to the trade mark – Alleged use of the sign as a trade name. . .
See AlsoBudejovicky Budvar Narodni Podnik v Anheuser-Busch Inc ChD 19-Feb-2008
. .
See AlsoBudejovicky Budvar Narodni Podnik v Anheuser-Busch Inc CA 20-Oct-2009
The parties had long disputed the use of the trade marks ‘Bud’ and ‘Budweiser’ for their beers. The claimant now said that the defendants had made an abusive registration under the 1994 Act, by requesting a declaration that the registration by the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.77801