Log in

CLASS 46


Now in its twelfth year, Class 46 is dedicated to European trade mark law and practice. This weblog is written by a team of enthusiasts who want to spread the word and share their thoughts with others.

Want to receive Class 46 by email?
Click here subscribe for free.

Who we all are...
Anthonia Ghalamkarizadeh
Birgit Clark
Blog Administrator
Christian Tenkhoff
Fidel Porcuna
Gino Van Roeyen
Markku Tuominen
Niamh Hall
Nikos Prentoulis
Stefan Schröter
Tomasz Rychlicki
Yvonne Onomor
MONDAY, 18 AUGUST 2014
Switzerland: LAND ROVER defeats LAND GLIDER

Land Rover, the British manufacturer of off-road vehicles, finally wins its opposition against Nissan Motor's LAND GLIDER mark in Switzerland. Both marks claim protection for vehicles in Nice class 12. The Swiss Intellectual Property Office dismissed the opposition, essentially arguing that despite the well-knowness of the older mark LAND ROVER, Land Rover could not be granted exclusive rights in the term LAND for vehicles.

On appeal, the Federal Administrative Court reversed. It held that the high recognition of the older mark LAND ROVER was notorious (i.e., needed no further proof). The recognition extended to the whole mark, LAND ROVER, and not only to ROVER, even though LAND was arguably descriptive for (land) vehicles. The fact that Land Rover had also registered the mark ROVER and RANGE ROVER did not change this assessment. Given the similarities of the signs, the essentially identical goods and LAND ROVER's status as well-known mark, there was a risk that the public would assume that LAND GLIDER was a variant of a LAND ROVER, creating a likelihood of confusion (well...).

Nissan Motors argued in vain that there were other marks for vehicles that contained LAND. As is long standing practice, it is not enough to demonstrate dilution to point to registrations containing the same term. What is required is actual use of other marks containing the same term, and this had not been shown.

Decision B-4829/2012 of 28 July 2014 (German summary with link to full text). The decision is final.

PS: picture shows the author (in the tasteful shirt) checking whether a LAND ROVER, which wasn't roving anymore through the Masai Mara of Kenya, still had an engine.

Posted by: Mark Schweizer @ 21.10
Tags: Switzerland, relative grounds of refusal,
Sharing on Social Media? Use the link below...
Perm-A-Link: https://www.marques.org/blogs/class46?XID=BHA3822
Reader Comments: 0
Post a Comment


MARQUES does not guarantee the accuracy of the information in this blog. The views are those of the individual contributors and do not necessarily reflect those of MARQUES. Seek professional advice before action on any information included here.


The Class 46 Archive






 

 

 

 

 

 


CONTACT

info@marques.org
+44 (0)116 2747355
POST ADDRESS

9 Cartwright Court, Cartwright Way
Bardon, Leicestershire
LE67 1UE

EMAIL

Ingrid de Groot
Internal Relations Officer
ingrid.de.groot@marques.org
Alessandra Romeo
External Relations Officer
aromeo@marques.org
James Nurton
Newsletter Editor
editor@marques.org
Robert Harrison
Webmaster
robertharrison@marques.org
BLOGS

Signup for our blogs.
Headlines delivered to your inbox