L’Oreal Sa and Others v Bellure Nv and Others: CA 21 May 2010

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).
Jacob, Wall, Rimer LJJ
[2010] EWCA Civ 535, [2010] WLR (D) 134
Bailii, WLRD
Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Council Directive 89/104/EEC 5(1)(a)
England and Wales
See AlsoL’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 AlsoL’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 AlsoL’Oreal Sa and others v Bellure Nv and others CA 10-Oct-2007
. .
See AlsoIntel 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 . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 February 2021; Ref: scu.415975