35. Trade mark registration

Author(s):  
L. Bently ◽  
B. Sherman ◽  
D. Gangjee ◽  
P. Johnson

This chapter focuses on the process of registration for trade marks in the UK, the European Union, and other countries. It begins by explaining the differences in procedures and documentation needed in filing trade mark applications at the national, regional, and international levels. The role of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) in processing applications in the EU is considered, along with the international filing systems established under the 1891 Madrid Agreement and the 1989 Madrid Protocol. The chapter concludes by presenting possible avenues through which to acquire trade mark protection. It briefly considers the possible impacts of Brexit.

Author(s):  
L. Bently ◽  
B. Sherman ◽  
D. Gangjee ◽  
P. Johnson

This chapter focuses on ‘relative grounds’ for denying an application to register a trade mark as set out in section 5 of the Trade Marks Act 1994 and Article 8 of the European Union Trade Marks Regulation (EUTMR). It identifies ‘earlier trade marks’ and ‘earlier rights’ before turning to the tests which allow a prior mark to oppose the registration of a subsequent one. First, it reviews the so-called double identity ground, where an identical (later) mark is applied for, in the context of identical products. Second, it considers when likelihood of confusion may be established. Third, it surveys three situations referred to collectively as ‘dilution’, where the later mark may mentally evoke the earlier one in a way that is not confusing, yet still wrongful. It also explains the ‘advertising function’ of a trade mark, along with requirements relating to reputation and ‘due cause’. Finally, the chapter discusses relevant provisions governing unregistered trade marks, copyright, design right, and registered design right in the UK.


Public Law ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 756-794
Author(s):  
Andrew Le Sueur ◽  
Maurice Sunkin ◽  
Jo Eric Khushal Murkens

This chapter introduces the project of European integration and discusses the legal basis of the EU, which consists of treaties that authorize law-making. It will identify the principal executive institutions of the European Union and their functions. They will be classified under the headings of supranationalism and intergovernmentalism. The chapter will also examine the process of enacting legislation and the role of the European Parliament. Drawing on an understanding of similar institutions and processes in the UK, the discussion is particularly concerned with an assessment of the institutions in terms of public law values, such as legitimacy, accountability, and transparency.


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-36
Author(s):  
Marta Simoncini ◽  
Giuseppe Martinico

What was the role of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in the Brexit saga? And what will the impact of Brexit be over the future structure and activity of the CJEU? This article deals with this twofold question and explores three different issues. Firstly, we will offer a reflection on the questions and the risks raised by the Wightman case, where the CJEU ruled on the unilateral revocation of the UK notification of its intention to withdraw from the European Union under Art. 50 Treaty of the EU. Secondly, we will analyse the impact of Brexit on the composition of the CJEU and, particularly, the risks for the independence of the Court raised by the advanced termination of the mandate of the British Advocate General. Thirdly, we will provide some insights on the scope of the jurisdiction of the CJEU in the post-Brexit Union, emphasising how the Withdrawal Agreement maintained its jurisdiction during and even beyond the transition period. This article reflects the events that took place up to 6 October 2020.


Author(s):  
Ilanah Fhima ◽  
Dev S. Gangjee

The role of distinctiveness is perhaps the least understood element of the likelihood of confusion analysis. Obscure in its origins, the idea that the more distinctive a mark is, the more likely confusion should be has been repeatedly accepted by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), but this is also strongly criticised by commentators and UK judges in particular. This chapter seeks to understand the role that distinctiveness plays in the assessment of confusion, explaining how it entered the European trade mark system and critically evaluating its role. On a practical level, this chapter seeks to understand the impact of distinctiveness through examples of levels of distinctiveness that have and have not been accepted to result in enhanced protection, and also to consider how tribunals have dealt with the overlap between distinctiveness for registrablity and likelihood of confusion purposes. However, the chapter ends with a note of warning: although it is possible to find a significant number of cases where distinctiveness is employed to enhance the scope of protection trade marks, in the vast majority of cases, this factor is either not mentioned or deemed irrelevant.


Author(s):  
Alexander Mühlendahl ◽  
Dimitris Botis ◽  
Spyros Maniatis ◽  
Imogen Wiseman

The purpose of this chapter is to offer an introduction on the role of the Court of Justice and its effect on the development of trade mark law in Europe.


2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-5
Author(s):  
Darren Meale ◽  
Nicola Walles

Abstract The Icelandic Ministry for Foreign Affairs and Others v Iceland Foods Limited, EUIPO Cancellation No 14 030 C (Invalidity), 5 April 2019; Icelandic Trade mark Holding ehf v Iceland Foods Limited, EUIPO Cancellation No. 19 387 C (Invalidity), 27 May 2019 Iceland Foods’ European Union trade marks for ICELAND were held invalid for all goods and services in a duo of recent decisions from the European Union Intellectual Property Office Cancellation Division, after The Icelandic Ministry for Foreign Affairs successfully argued that the exclusive rights conferred on the food and beverage retail giant unfairly monopolized what is, of course, the name of a country in the European Economic Area.


2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 107-127
Author(s):  
Tamar Khuchua

The Court of Justice of the European Union has suggested that when the concept set out in the EU regulation is not defined by that regulation, it should be understood according to its usual, everyday meaning. There is no doubt that the understanding of ‘bad faith’ might differ from one person to another and especially from one firm to another. Indeed, ‘bad faith’ in trade mark law might take many different forms which are not easy to detect as the large number of cases concerning the issue of ‘bad faith’ in relation to national and EU trade marks illustrate. By analysing the current legislative framework as well as the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, the paper suggests that in order to maintain and even extend the smooth functioning of the EU trade mark system, legislative changes should be introduced. In particular, it is argued that it is reasonable to examine the intention of trade mark applicants already at the application stage in order to avoid the waste of resources and the burden of dealing with the trade marks registered in ‘bad faith’ in the invalidity proceedings post factum and to provide a non-exhaustive list of what elements the ‘bad faith’ can consist of. These amendments should also do good in terms of serving the broader goals of the EU law, which amongst others include, undistorted competition, legal certainty and sound administration.


2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (Vol 18, No 4 (2019)) ◽  
pp. 439-453
Author(s):  
Ihor LISHCHYNSKYY

The article is devoted to the study of the implementation of territorial cohesion policy in the European Union in order to achieve a secure regional coexistence. In particular, the regulatory and institutional origins of territorial cohesion policy in the EU are considered. The evolution of ontological models of cohesion policy has been outlined. Specifically, the emphasis is placed on the key objective of political geography – effectively combining the need for "territorialization" and the growing importance of networking. The role of urbanization processes in the context of cohesion policy is highlighted. Cross-border dimensions of cohesion policy in the context of interregional cooperation are explored. Particular emphasis is placed on the features of integrated sustainable development strategies.


Author(s):  
Antoine Vandemoorteele

This article analyzes the role of the European Union (EU) and Canada in the promotion of Security Sector Reforms (SSR) activities in two regional organizations, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The concept of SSR seeks to address the effective governance of security in post-conflict environment by transforming the security institutions within a country in order for them to have more efficient, legitimate and democratic role in implementing security. Recent debates within the EU have led to the adoption of an SSR concept from the Council and a new strategy from the European Commission on the SSR activities. Within the framework of the ESDP, the EU has positioned itself as a leading actor, in this domain, including in its crisis management operations. On the other hand, Canada, through its whole-of government and human security programs has also been an important actor in the promotion of SSR activities. Yet, even though several international organizations (including the United Nations, the OSCE and NATO) are effectively doing SSR activities on the ground, there does not exist a common framework within any of these organizations despite the role of the EU and Canada. As such, it is surprising to found no global common policy for SSR while this approach is precisely holistic in its foundations. Taking these elements into consideration, this paper analyzes two specific aspects : a) the absence of a common policy framework within international organizations and b) the major differences between the approaches of the OSCE and NATO in the domain of SSR and the implications for the EU and Canada’ roles.   Full extt available at: https://doi.org/10.22215/rera.v3i2.186


This book provides the first comprehensive analysis of the withdrawal agreement concluded between the United Kingdom and the European Union to create the legal framework for Brexit. Building on a prior volume, it overviews the process of Brexit negotiations that took place between the UK and the EU from 2017 to 2019. It also examines the key provisions of the Brexit deal, including the protection of citizens’ rights, the Irish border, and the financial settlement. Moreover, the book assesses the governance provisions on transition, decision-making and adjudication, and the prospects for future EU–UK trade relations. Finally, it reflects on the longer-term challenges that the implementation of the 2016 Brexit referendum poses for the UK territorial system, for British–Irish relations, as well as for the future of the EU beyond Brexit.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document