header-logo header-logo

ECJ: comparative ads can use rival trade marks

19 June 2008
Issue: 7326 / Categories: Legal News , EU
printer mail-detail

Legal news

A trade mark owner cannot stop a rival using an identical or similar sign in a comparative advertisement where the use is not likely to confuse the public, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has ruled.

In O2 Holdings Limited and O2 (UK) Limited v Hutchison 3G UK Limited, Hutchison 3G (H3G), included the name O2 and moving bubble imagery in an advert for its Threepay service.

O2, which owns two British trade marks consisting of a static picture of bubbles, brought proceedings for trade mark infringement.

The ECJ said a trade mark owner may prevent the use of a sign similar to his mark only if used: in the course of trade; without the consent of the mark owner; in respect of goods or services identical with, or similar to, those for which the mark is registered; in a way likely to confuse the public. The court said the first three conditions were satisfied but that the use by H3G of bubble images similar to the trade marks did not give rise to a likelihood of confusion on the part of consumers. O2’s case therefore failed.

Macfarlanes solicitor, Michael Walmsley, says: “A trade mark owner cannot object to use of marks similar to his trade mark in comparative advertisements unless he can show that the use of the mark causes a likelihood of confusion or unfairly takes advantage of or discredits his trade mark.”

Issue: 7326 / Categories: Legal News , EU
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Kingsley Napley—Claire Green

Kingsley Napley—Claire Green

Firm announces appointment of chief legal officer

Weightmans—Emma Eccles & Mark Woodall

Weightmans—Emma Eccles & Mark Woodall

Firm bolsters Manchester insurance practice with double partner appointment

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Partner joins family law team inLondon

NEWS
Transferring anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorism financing supervision to the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) could create extra paperwork and increase costs for clients, lawyers have warned 
In this week's NLJ, Bhavini Patel of Howard Kennedy LLP reports on Almacantar v De Valk [2025], a landmark Upper Tribunal ruling extending protection for leaseholders under the Building Safety Act 2022
Writing in NLJ this week, Hanna Basha and Jamie Hurworth of Payne Hicks Beach dissect TV chef John Torode’s startling decision to identify himself in a racism investigation he denied. In an age of ‘cancel culture’, they argue, self-disclosure can both protect and imperil reputations
As he steps down as Chancellor of the High Court, Sir Julian Flaux reflects on over 40 years in law, citing independence, impartiality and integrity as guiding principles. In a special interview with Grania Langdon-Down for NLJ, Sir Julian highlights morale, mentorship and openness as key to a thriving judiciary
Dinsdale v Fowell is a High Court case entangling bigamy, intestacy and modern family structures, examined in this week's NLJ by Shivi Rajput of Stowe Family Law
back-to-top-scroll