Never too Late: If you missed the IPKat the past weeks!

It has been a busy few weeks for the IPKat and it’s about time to take a look at what we have covered during this time:-


The Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys (CIPA) reported that the European Patent Office (EPO) Administrative Council decided to abolish the 10-day rule, i.e., notification from the EPO is considered to occur 10 days after the date on which the notification was sent.  The change means that a notification will be considered as occurring on the day that the document is sent by the EPO.  For more information, you can refer to PatKat Rose Hughes’ post here.

Rose also reported on Jones v Irmac Roads ([2022] EWHC 495 (IPEC)), a decision delivered by the High Court of Justice of England and Wales.  At its core, the case relates to whether the right to file a patent application in the future is covered by the same provisions relating to the right to an existing patent or patent application.   

Trade Marks

Many would consider the shape of Dior’s Saddle bag to be iconic.  Yet, the 2nd Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office held otherwise in a recent decision (Case R32/2022-2) that refused registration of the Saddle shape in relation to “Bags, handbags, pouches (leather goods), travel kits (leather goods), toiletry and make-up cases (empty)”.  Strong beholder that the Saddle shape is distinctive, PermaKat Eleonora Rosati reported on this decision here.

Another case on unconventional trade marks: GuestKat Nedim Malovic reported on a recent decision (Case T-168/21) of the EU General Court considering whether a colour mark could be sufficiently distinctive to be registered as an EUTM for goods in Classes 6, 9 and 17.

As a reminder to brand owners looking to enter the China market, SpecialKat Tian Lu considered in her post how powerful the Chinese language integrity point can be.  


One of the main principles of the Berne Convention is that of national treatment.  Article 2(7) provides an exception to this principle with respect to industrial designs and models, as well as applied art.  GuestKat Jan Jacobi wrote a post on two recent decisions by the Dutch courts (Jaguar Land Rover v Ineos and Vitra v Kwantum) with diverging approaches to Article 2(7).


According to Article 9 of Design Regulation (EC) No 6/2002, a design right shall not subsist in a design that is contrary to public policy or to accepted principles of morality.  An equivalent provision is also included in the Design Directive 98/71/EC.  GuestKat Anastasiia Kyrylenko considered relevant interpretations in design case law here.

Anastasiia also wrote a post on pending case C-472/21 which will require the Court of Justice of the European Union to issue its first ruling on the concept of “normal use” in EU design law.  Anastasiia discussed Advocate General Szpunar’s recently delivered Opinion on this matter.  

Fashion Law

The Uffizi museum in Florence, Italy, is taking legal action against Jean Paul Gaultier over the unauthorised reproduction of the well-known Renaissance painting Birth of Venus by Sandro Botticelli in garments and accessories that are part of Gaultier’s spring/summer 2022 Le Musée capsule collection.  The legal basis is the Italian Cultural Heritage Code. PermaKat Eleonora provided further details here.

Katfriend Felicia Caponigri made a contribution on the IP implications of the recent and seemingly already iconic Dolce & Gabbana fashion show at the recent Milan Fashion Week.


Not just the UK, but most parts of the world are still saddened by the death of Queen Elizabeth II, the longest reigning monarch in British history.  Katfriends Jamie Brazier and Abida Chaudri provided an enlightening discussion of the right to use the Royal Arms following the death of the Queen here.

In France, the French Patent and Trade Mark Office recently registered “Couteau Laguiole” as a geographical indication (GI) for a knife produced in the French communes of Laguiole and Thiers.  As GuestKat Anastasiia Kyrylenko wrote, this registration has had a tumultuous road en route to registration: historical disputes, conflicts with trade marks, a legal reform and two separate GI applications.  For further details, you can refer to Anastasiia’s post here.

The EUIPO recently issued a discussion paper entitled "Automated Content Recognition: IP Enforcement and management use cases”.  This study is the second phase of a project already started in 2019.  InternKat Giorgio Luceri provided his review here. 

The EUIPO also held the webinar “Trade marks and designs in the metaverse: legal aspects/EUIPO practice”, with TechieKat Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo reporting on this event here.


Never too Late: If you missed the IPKat the past weeks! Never too Late: If you missed the IPKat the past weeks! Reviewed by James Kwong on Thursday, October 20, 2022 Rating: 5

No comments:

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:

Powered by Blogger.