The Sherwin-Williams Company v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-190/05)

Judgment of 12 Jun 2007

law://eu/cjeu/2005/t-190-05/para_31@2026-11-13

31The fact that the mark applied for is composed of ordinary words, which are comprehensible to consumers, does not affect the mark's distinctive character. The Court of First Instance has held on this point that the mere fact that each of the components of the sign, considered separately, is devoid of distinctive character does not mean that in combination they cannot present a distinctive character. The onus was, to the contrary, on the Board of Appeal to show that the sign concerned, taken as a whole, did not enable the targeted public to distinguish the applicant's goods from those having a different commercial origin (Case T-260/03 Celltech v OHIM (CELLTECH) [2005] ECR II-1215, paragraphs 43 and 44). According to the applicant, it is not necessary for the sign applied for to convey any exact information as to the identity of the company which is marketing the product, rather it is sufficient for the mark in question to enable the relevant public to distinguish the goods covered by it from those which have a different commercial origin (Case T-173/00 KWS Saat v OHIM (Shade of orange) [2002] ECR II-3843, paragraph 44).

The Sherwin-Williams Company v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-190/05)

History · 1 version

Key facts

Connections