Legal updates and opinions
News / News
European Union: Adidas Ruling
By Donvay Wegierski, Director
The General court of the European Union recently upheld a 2016 ruling by the EU regulator thereby cancelling Adidas EU trade mark registration comprising three stripes depicted as:
This trade mark was filed in 2014 and the registration thereof challenged by Belgian company, Shoe Branding Europe. The General court ruled that this trade mark lacked distinctive character and is instead an ordinary figurative mark. The court found that the evidence adduced did not sufficiently show that the consumer, on seeing this three stripe mark applied to clothing, footwear and headgear in the EU would associate the mark with Adidas.
This judgement demonstrates the firm stance adopted by the EU when assessing distinctiveness. Since a trade mark grants the proprietor exclusivity to a mark in relation to the goods and services for which it is registered – in this instance clothing, footwear and headgear in class 25 – the distinctiveness requirement is absolute. The manner in which the trade mark was registered requires particular consideration being three black vertical stripes. Although the court did not find in favour of Adidas in this instance, the ruling may have no effect on the broad scope of protection that Adidas already has on its well-known three stripes registered in various forms in Europe and elsewhere.
If you would like to learn more about Intellectual Property please visit our practice area page.
Latest News
Key elements of the Mining Charter, 2018
INTRODUCTION This note is designed to highlight the essential provisions contained in the Mining Charter, 2018 gazetted on 27 September [...]
“What constitutes hate speech?” – the equality court answers
On 5 October 2018, Sutherland J handed down an important judgment in the discourse of what constitutes hate speech in [...]
“WHAT CONSTITUTES HATE SPEECH?” – THE EQUALITY COURT ANSWERS
What constitutes hate speech On 5 October 2018, Sutherland J handed down an important judgment in the discourse of what [...]
The admissibility of evidence related to discussions held during a conciliation hearing
By Jacques van Wyk, Director and Yusha Davidson, Candidate Attorney ISSUE Can the Labour Court receive and rely on evidence [...]
Does a gross failure in procedure expose an employer to the risk of maximum permissible compensation even if there is a justification for the dismissal?
By Jacques van Wyk, Director and Yusha Davidson, Candidate Attorney ISSUE If a retrenchment was unavoidable, can the employer skimp [...]
#metooza – sexual harassment in the workplace in south africa
By Bradley Workman-Davies, Director and Megan Livingstone, Candidate Attorne Recently, and on an ongoing basis, revelations of sexual harassment in [...]
