The claimant, manufacturers of perfumes, complained that the defendants, manufacturers of smell-alike products, were in breach of the Directive in marketing their products using lists which identified those of the claimants products to which they were intended to smell similar.
Held: The claim succeeded. The defendant’s use of the registered marks in the comparison lists was a use within art 5 of Directive 89/104, since went beyond one which was ‘purely descriptive’ being used for advertising. It was therefore not protected by the Comparative Advertising Directive because it did not comply with the condition (h) in art 3a(1) and therefore also not condition (g).
Judges:
Jacob, Wall, Rimer LJJ
Citations:
[2010] EWCA Civ 535, [2010] WLR (D) 134
Links:
Statutes:
Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Council Directive 89/104/EEC 5(1)(a)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – L’Oreal Sa and others v Bellure Nv and others ChD 24-May-2006
Action for trade mark infringement and passing off – suggestion that goods of such superior quality that no possibility of confusion. . .
See Also – 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 . .
See Also – L’Oreal Sa and others v Bellure Nv and others CA 10-Oct-2007
. .
See Also – Intel Corporation v CPM United Kingdom Ltd (Approximation Of Laws) ECJ 27-Nov-2008
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Intellectual Property, European
Updated: 18 August 2022; Ref: scu.415975