ECJ limits confusion to German-speaking member states only

The ECJ held that Articles 1(2), 9(1)(b) and 102(1) of the EU trade mark (EUTM) Regulation (207/2009) meant that, where the earlier court found that the use of a sign created a likelihood of confusion within only one part of the EU the earlier court MUST issue an order which effectively splits the confusion.

The Regional Court in Dusseldorf found that “combit” by a company selling software under the word sign “Commit” was only infringed for the average German-speaking consumer, but not for English-speaking consumers.

The decision followed from its judgment in DHL Express (France) SAS v Chronopost SA, Case C-235/09

If you’d like to know more about this article please send an email to Michael Coyle quoting the article title and any questions you might have, alternatively call the office number on 02380 235 979 or send an enquiry through our contact form.

share this Article

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on whatsapp
Share on email

Recent Articles

How are NFT’s regulated in the UK?

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has not yet provided guidance on NFT’s specifically with regards to regulation in the United Kingdom (UK). However, the FCA

What is an NFT and why create one?

NFT stands for non-fungible token. Non-fungible essentially means the token is unique and cannot be replaced with another. For example, a Bitcoin is fungible, so,