Trademark Registration Process In The Eu.
TRADEMARK REGISTRATION PROCESS IN THE EU
A trademark is a sign capable of distinguishing the goods or services of one enterprise from those of others. In the European Union, trademarks can be registered either:
Nationally – through individual EU Member States’ IP Offices (e.g., UKIPO, INPI France, DPMA Germany)
Union-wide – as a European Union Trade Mark (EUTM) via the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)
1. LEGAL BASIS
EU Trademark Regulation (EUTMR 2017, Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) governs EUTMs.
Directive 2015/2436/EU harmonizes national trademark laws.
Key sections:
Article 4 – Absolute grounds for refusal
Article 7 – Relative grounds (conflicts with prior marks)
Article 12–13 – Rights conferred and infringement
2. TRADEMARK REGISTRATION PROCESS IN THE EU
Step 1: Preliminary Search
Goal: Identify conflicts with existing marks.
Tool: EUIPO’s TMview database, national registers.
Importance: Avoids relative grounds refusal under Article 8.
Step 2: Filing the Application
File via EUIPO (for EUTM) or national office.
Required elements:
Applicant details (individual/company)
Representation of the trademark (word, logo, sound, shape)
List of goods/services (Nice Classification)
Payment of fees
Filing fees (EUIPO):
€850 for 1 class, €50 for 2nd, €150 each additional.
Step 3: Formal Examination
EUIPO checks:
Formal requirements (name, representation, fee)
Absolute grounds of refusal (distinctiveness, descriptiveness, generic terms)
Step 4: Publication and Opposition
Accepted trademarks are published in the EU Trademark Bulletin.
Third parties have 3 months to file opposition citing earlier conflicting rights.
Step 5: Registration and Certificate
If no opposition, or opposition is overcome, mark is registered for 10 years, renewable indefinitely.
Registration confers exclusive rights across the EU.
Step 6: Renewal and Enforcement
Renew every 10 years (EUIPO allows renewal up to 6 months before expiry).
Enforcement can be pursued via national courts or EUIPO Board of Appeal.
3. CASE LAWS RELATED TO EU TRADEMARK REGISTRATION
Here are 6 landmark EU cases demonstrating the principles of trademark registration, distinctiveness, and conflicts:
Case 1: L’Oréal v. Bellure (C-487/07, 2009)
Facts:
Bellure marketed perfumes as “similar to” L’Oréal products.
L’Oréal claimed trademark infringement and unfair advantage.
Legal Issue:
Does comparative advertising that references a registered mark infringe rights?
Court Observations:
EU Trademark Directive Article 5 protects against taking unfair advantage of reputation.
Distinctive marks enjoy protection even if used in descriptive context.
Lesson:
Registration confers broad protection against dilution or unfair exploitation.
Case 2: Sieckmann v. German Patent Office (C-273/00, 2002)
Facts:
Applicant tried to register a smell mark (“methyl cinnamate” smell).
Legal Issue:
Can a non-traditional mark like a scent satisfy EU registration criteria?
Court Observations:
Sign must be clear, precise, self-contained, easily accessible, intelligible, durable, and objective.
Smell marks are very hard to register.
Lesson:
EUIPO applies strict absolute grounds checks under Article 7.
Case 3: Windsurfing Chiemsee v. Boots (C-108/97, 1999)
Facts:
Boots sought to register “Windsurfing Chiemsee” for clothing.
Legal Issue:
Does geographical name “Chiemsee” lack distinctiveness?
Court Observations:
Marks consisting of geographical terms must show acquired distinctiveness through use.
Lesson:
Absolute grounds for refusal (Article 7) require evaluation of distinctive character.
Case 4: OHIM v. Shaker (C-334/05 P, 2007)
Facts:
Shaker applied to register a mark, rejected due to earlier similar mark.
Legal Issue:
Relative grounds: conflict with prior marks (Article 8).
Court Observations:
Likelihood of confusion assessed by visual, phonetic, conceptual similarity.
EU courts gave guidance on overall impression vs minor differences.
Lesson:
Preliminary search and opposition analysis are critical to avoid rejection.
Case 5: Nestlé v. Mondelez / Cadbury (C-215/14, 2016)
Facts:
Cadbury attempted to register a purple color for chocolate packaging.
Legal Issue:
Can a single color serve as a trademark under EU law?
Court Observations:
Single colors can be registered if they have acquired distinctiveness (recognized by public as brand identifier).
Lesson:
Registration requires evidence of secondary meaning and acquired distinctiveness.
Case 6: Interflora v. Marks & Spencer (C-323/09, 2011)
Facts:
Marks & Spencer used keyword advertising referencing Interflora marks.
Legal Issue:
Does use of trademark in online advertising infringe?
Court Observations:
Keywords and online ads can constitute trademark use.
EU law protects marks against unfair use and confusion online.
Lesson:
Modern applications of trademarks include keyword advertising, domain names, and online presence.
4. KEY PRINCIPLES FOR EU TRADEMARK REGISTRATION
| Step | Key Principle | Case Reference |
|---|---|---|
| Absolute Grounds | Must be distinctive, not generic, descriptive, or deceptive | Sieckmann, Windsurfing Chiemsee |
| Relative Grounds | Must not conflict with earlier marks causing confusion | OHIM v. Shaker |
| Use / Acquired Distinctiveness | Colors, shapes, or non-traditional marks need public recognition | Nestlé v. Cadbury |
| Reputation / Dilution | Famous marks protected from unfair advantage | L’Oréal v. Bellure |
| Modern Challenges | Online use / keyword advertising | Interflora v. Marks & Spencer |
| Registration Scope | Union-wide rights, renewable indefinitely | EUTMR Articles 12–13 |
5. AUDIT IMPLICATIONS FOR CORPORATES
Pre-filing audit – Conduct comprehensive search for prior marks and conflicts.
Distinctiveness check – Evaluate whether proposed mark is inherently distinctive or requires evidence.
Documentation – Maintain marketing and usage evidence to prove acquired distinctiveness.
Portfolio management – Track renewals, oppositions, and potential infringements.
Cross-border strategy – Consider EUTM for EU-wide protection, supplement with national marks if needed.
6. CONCLUSION
EU trademark registration involves formal filing, examination, publication, and opposition.
Absolute and relative grounds are rigorously enforced by EUIPO and courts.
Case law demonstrates that courts focus on distinctiveness, likelihood of confusion, and protection against dilution/unfair advantage.
Corporates must conduct thorough audits, searches, and evidence collection before filing to ensure defensible trademark rights.
RELATED Blog
comments