Judgment_paragraph 34 · Sigla v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-215/03)

34It is also apparent from the wording of Article 8(5) of Regulation No 40/94 that its application is subject to the following conditions: first, that the marks at issue are identical or similar; secondly, that the earlier mark cited in opposition has a reputation and, thirdly, that there is a risk that the use without due cause of the trade mark applied for would take unfair advantage of, or be detrimental to, the distinctive character or the repute of the earlier trade mark. Those conditions are cumulative and failure to satisfy one of them is sufficient to render that provision inapplicable (Case T-67/04 Spa Monopole v OHIM — Spa-Finders Travel Arrangements (SPA-FINDERS) [2005] ECR II-1825, paragraph 30).

Sigla v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-215/03)

Key facts

History · 1 version

Connections