• 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
      • Dr. Christoph Hölscher
    • Commitment
  • Contact
    • Where To Find Us
    • Write us!
    • Request call back
  • Blog

Armani trademark ‘Le Sac’ loses against earlier national trademark

26. March 2020

The case Le Sac versus Le Sac was decided today before the European Court in favour of the earlier national spanish trademark ‘Le Sac’. The later Armani trademark ‘Le Sac’ leads to a likelihood of confusion.

Today the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruled on the case Le Sac versus Le Sac, which concerns the likelihood of confusion between the younger Armani trademark ‘Le Sac’ and the earlier Spanish national trademark ‘Le Sac’. A word element containing a famous brand name such as Armani does not become the dominant element despite its fame.

The facts

Armani Marke 'Le Sac'
Armani mark ‘Le Sac’

Armani applied for a Union figurative mark which shows three elements: the stylised verbal element ‘le sac’, above it in a smaller verbal element ‘giorgio armani’ and below it the number 11, written in even smaller characters.

Felipe Domingo Asunción (Spain) filed an opposition against that application, citing his own earlier national word and figurative marks ‘Le Sac’.

The Opposition Division upheld the opposition. Armani appealed against the decision to the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, which dismissed the appeal by decision of 13 August 2018 (‘the contested decision’). The decision was based on the fact that, although the marks at issue were not conceptually similar, they were visually and phonetically similar on average. There is a likelihood of confusion between the marks at issue.

In today’s judgment, the European Court (CJEU) confirmed this decision and ruled on the likelihood of confusion pursuant to Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation 2017/1001.

Armani Marke 'Le Sac'

Visual and phonetic similarity decisive

The Court stated that there is an average degree of visual and phonetic similarity between the signs at issue, since the element ‘le sac’ is partially identical in the marks at issue. According to the appellant, in the overall impression created by the mark applied for, the word element ‘le sac’, on account of its size, stylisation and central position, and the word element ‘giorgio armani’, on account of its size, are the most important elements.

The Court emphasised that the visual and phonetic similarity was of sole relevance in the present case, since the conceptual comparison was irrelevant in this case, since the signs were not conceptually similar because of their meaninglessness (since the French word ‘sac’ is translated into Spanish by the word ‘bolsa’).

Armani had argued that the word element ‘giorgio armani’ was the most distinctive and therefore dominant element of the mark applied for because of its fame. Indeed, the CJEU confirmed that if an element is itself a well-known mark in a composite mark, it may play a more important role in a composite mark. However, it does not follow from this that the comparison between the signs at issue can be limited to taking into account only that element as compared with the earlier marks, the element ‘le sac’ is also visually important for the overall impression and has average distinctiveness.

Similarity of goods and services

According to settled case-law, in assessing the similarity of the goods or services in question, all the relevant factors relating to those goods or services should be taken into account. Those factors include, inter alia, their nature, their end users and their method of use and whether they are in competition with each other or are complementary, and also their distribution channels.

There is a low to average degree of similarity between the goods and services in question, the CJEU stated.

This is relevant, because the assessment of a likelihood of confusion is based first on the similarity between the signs in interaction with the similarity between the goods and services. Incidentally, these may also show similarity beyond the classification according to the Nice classes, as we have already reported on several occasions. A lesser degree of similarity between the goods or services designated may be offset by a greater degree of similarity between the marks and vice versa.

Average degree of distinctiveness

The distinctive character of a contested mark is taken into account only after the assessment of similarity. In the present case, the CJEU assessed that the contested Armani mark Le Sac has an average degree of distinctiveness. In the clothing sector, it is not an unusual practice to design a mark differently, the Court explained.

Therefore, the CJEU held that the Board of Appeal had not made an error in its assessment and confirmed a likelihood of confusion caused by the contested Armani mark Le Sac.

Would you also like to protect or defend your brand?

Our lawyers will be happy to advise you. Please contact us if you are interested – we look forward to your call!

 

Sources:

Judgement of CJEU Armani ‘Le Sac’, EU:T:2020:121

Image:

RayPhotosPerth | pixabay.com | CCO License

  • share  
  • share 
  • share 
  • tweet 
  • share 

Category iconTrademark Law Tag iconsimilarity,  famous name,  judgment,  Phonetic similarity,  CJEU,  Le Sac,  CFI,  Armani,  distinctive character,  clothing sector,  Armani trademark Le Sac,  likelihood of confusion,  visual similarity,  fashion

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

Primary Sidebar

More articles about: Trademark 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

Recent Posts

  • BPatG: Patent claim of cancer drug on active substance as salt 7. March 2022
  • Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022 4. March 2022
  • CODE-X vs. Cody’s: Likelihood of confusion in drinks? 25. February 2022
  • EOS lip balm no 3D trademark – appeal before ECJ not admissible 24. February 2022

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:

4. March 2022
Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022

Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022

25. February 2022
CODE-X vs. Cody’s: Likelihood of confusion in drinks?

CODE-X vs. Cody’s: Likelihood of confusion in drinks?

24. February 2022
EOS lip balm no 3D trademark – appeal before ECJ not admissible

EOS lip balm no 3D trademark – appeal before ECJ not admissible

21. February 2022
CFI: Pumpkin seed oil + PGI symbol

CFI: Pumpkin seed oil + PGI symbol

15. February 2022
SPOTIFY v POTIFY – a ‘pot’ app

SPOTIFY v POTIFY – a ‘pot’ app

10. February 2022
CFI: Shoes MADE IN ITALY

CFI: Shoes MADE IN ITALY

Contact us or request a call back

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]
Request a call back

Footer

Contact

Torhaus Westhafen
Speicherstrasse 59
D – 60327 Frankfurt am Main
Deutschland
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 199
[email protected]

Office Hours
Moday – Friday:   08:00-18:00

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
  • Company
  • Our Law Firm
  • ISO Certificate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Data handling for clients
  • Imprint

Follow Us

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email

Newsletter Signup

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

Contact Form

 

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

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

Kontaktformular

 

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

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