• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]
Contact form
Patent- & Rechtsanwaltskanzlei

Patent- & Rechtsanwaltskanzlei

  • Deutsch

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email
MENUMENU
  • Services
    • Advice On Protective IP Rights
    • Patent Application /TM Registration
    • Enforcement Of IP Rights
    • Defence Against IP Rights Enforcement
    • Costs
  • Company
    • Fields of Law
      • Patent Law
      • Utility Model Law
      • Employees’ Inventions
      • Trademark Law
      • Design Law
      • Trademark and Product Piracy
      • Expert Opinions
    • Our Law Firm
      • Dr. Karl-Hermann Meyer-Dulheuer
      • Dr. Tim Meyer-Dulheuer
      • Dr. Klaus Zimmermann
      • Zhichao Ying
      • Clara Elinor Grünewald
    • Commitment
  • Contact
    • Where To Find Us
    • Write us!
    • Request call back
  • Blog

EU trademark 3D shape Kit Kat still under review

25. July 2018

Mondelez vs. Nestlé: EU trademark protection of 3D Kit Kat Form remains under review. Following today’s judgment of the European Court of Justice, the EUIPO must re-examine whether the three-dimensional shape of the product “Kit Cat 4 Finger” can be maintained as a Union trademark.

Will Nestlé lose EU-wide brand protection for the shape of its four-finger Kit Kat bar?
Competitor Mondelez has been trying to lift the protection of the 3D trademark since its registration with the EUIPO. In 2016 Mondelez scored a partial success before the Court of the European Union (EC), but both plaintiffs and defendants were dissatisfied with the judgment at the time.

By judgment of 15 December 2016, the Court annulled the decision of EUIPO. It found that the EUIPO had made a mistake in concluding that the mark at issue had become distinctive as a result of its use in the Union, even though this had only been established for part of the territory of the Union.

Nestlé, Mondelez and EUIPO dissatisfied with 2016 ruling

Kit KatMondelez as well as Nestlé and EUIPO have appealed the decision of the European Union Court of Justice of 2016. Mondelez does not agree with the ECJ’s finding that the 3D mark has become distinctive in the Union countries of Denmark, Germany, Spain, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Austria, Finland, Sweden and the United Kingdom through use.

Nestlé and EUIPO, on the other hand, see the judgment as jeopardising the principle of uniformity of the Union brand and the single market. In the view of those two parties, it is not necessary for Union trade mark proprietors to prove the distinctive character of each Member State.

Both plaintiffs and defendants therefore appealed the judgment, which was decided in today’s judgment.

Today’s judgment rejects all appeals

In today’s judgment, the Court rules that the appeal brought by Mondelez must be dismissed as inadmissible, since it does not seek to set aside the formula of the contested judgment, but merely to amend certain grounds of the judgment.

Nestlé’s appeals were also dismissed. It is not necessary for the registration of a trade mark which is initially devoid of any distinctive character to prove to each Member State that it has acquired distinctive character through use. However, the evidence submitted must enable it to be established that it has become distinctive in all the Member States of the Union in which it was devoid of any original distinctive character.

Nor is it sufficient that the person who bears the burden of proof should confine himself to presenting evidence which does not cover a part of the Union, even if it is only a single Member State, the ECJ made clear today. It follows from that that the Court of First Instance was right to annul the EUIPO decision in which the EUIPO found that the mark in question had achieved registration without commenting on the registration of the mark in Belgium, Ireland, Greece and Portugal.

Nestlé likely to lose EU-wide trademark protection

Following today’s judgment of the European Court of Justice, the EUIPO must re-examine whether the three-dimensional shape of the “Kit Kat 4 Finger” product can be maintained as a Union trademark. Today’s ruling makes it even more likely that Nestlé will lose EU-wide trademark protection for the shape of its four-finger Kit Kat bar.

Are you interested in Trademark protection and 3D form protection in the EU?

Please take your chance and contact us. Our lawyers are experienced in trademark and patent law, national and international law.

Sources:

Curia Europe: Judgement Mondelez vs Nestlé

Picture:

wikimedialimages / pixabay.com / CCO License

  • share  
  • share 
  • share 
  • tweet  
  • share 

Category iconDesign Law,  International Intellectual Property,  Trademark Law Tag icon3D,  Nestle,  3D Trademark,  Evidence,  Mondelez,  Mondelez vs. Nestlé,  Union Trade Mark,  inherently distinctivness,  3D shape,  each member state,  distinctiveness,  ECJ

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

More articles about: Design Law

All articles

Blog Menu

  • Design Law
  • Healthcare & Lifesciences
  • International Intellectual Property
  • Licenses
  • News from our law firm
  • Overall
  • Patent Law
  • Product- and Trademark piracy
  • Trademark Law
This form uses Google Recaptcha.

You must accept cookies from Google recaptcha to use this form.

More information can be found in our privacy policy.

load form

Recent Posts

  • Own trademark application fails – despite comparable trademarks: Equal treatment? 5. March 2021
  • Intel to pay 2.2 billion in damages – to VLSI / Fortress Investment 5. March 2021
  • BGH “FRAND II” – SEP Licensing as Distributor? 2. March 2021
  • Suspension of infringement proceedings 1. March 2021

Fields of Law

  • Patent Law
  • Utility Model Law
  • Employees’ Inventions
  • Trademark Law
  • Design Law
  • Trademark and Product Piracy
  • Expert Opinions
  • Costs

Das könnte Sie auch interessieren:

5. March 2021
Own trademark application fails – despite comparable trademarks: Equal treatment?

Own trademark application fails – despite comparable trademarks: Equal treatment?

1. March 2021
Suspension of infringement proceedings

Suspension of infringement proceedings

25. February 2021
Design protection in China: Amendment 2021

Design protection in China: Amendment 2021

16. February 2021
BGH: Black Forest ham – not only packaged in the Black Forest

BGH: Black Forest ham – not only packaged in the Black Forest

16. February 2021
UK trademark after Brexit: earlier UK trademark in opposition

UK trademark after Brexit: earlier UK trademark in opposition

11. February 2021
EU figurative marks: Panthé figurative mark – a panther mark?

EU figurative marks: Panthé figurative mark – a panther mark?

Footer

Contact

Franklinstr. 61-63
D-60486 Frankfurt am Main
Germany

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 199
[email protected]

Customer Reviews

Meyer-Dulheuer MD Legal Patentanwälte PartG mbB Patentrecht, Markenrecht, Eigentum hat 4,78 von 5 Sternen 23 Bewertungen auf ProvenExpert.com

Fields of Law

  • Patent Law
  • Utility Model Law
  • Employees’ Inventions
  • Trademark Law
  • Design Law
  • Trademark and Product Piracy
  • Expert Opinions
  • Costs

Law Firm

  • Request non-binding call back
  • Info secure emails
  • Company
  • Our Law Firm
  • ISO Certificate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Data handling for clients
  • Imprint

Follow Us

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email

Newsletter Signup

This form uses Google Recaptcha.

You must accept cookies from Google recaptcha to use this form.

More information can be found in our privacy policy.

load form

© Patent- & Rechtsanwaltskanzlei Meyer-Dulheuer MD Legal Patentanwälte PartG mbB

Kontaktformular

 

Rufen Sie uns an, schicken Sie uns eine Mail oder füllen Sie das Kontaktformular aus.

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]

This form uses Google Recaptcha.

You must accept cookies from Google recaptcha to use this form.

More information can be found in our privacy policy.

load form

Contact Form

 

Give us a call, send us an email or fill out the contact form.

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]

This form uses Google Recaptcha.

You must accept cookies from Google recaptcha to use this form.

More information can be found in our privacy policy.

load form