The European Court of Justice has given its ruling today in Case 29/05 P Kaul v OHIM. In short, the ECJ has set aside both the Court of First Instance decision in Case T‑164/02 and annulled the decision of the Third Board of Appeal. The case arises from Kaul's appeal against Atlantic Richfield's application to register the word ARCOL which, it claimed, was likely to cause confusion with its earlier registration of CAPOL.The IPKat will post further information and commentary later.
IPKat note on the Advocate General's Opinion here
IPKat short note on CFI decision here
Do you want to reuse the IPKat content? Please refer to our
Policies section.
If you have any queries or requests for permission, please get in touch with the IPKat team.
Comments
Post a Comment
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html