Two new reports have been published on the EUIPO website. They arise from the Boards of Appeal Consistency Circles project and reflect existing case law, the results of discussions within the Consistency Circles and the General Consistency Meeting of the BoA.

The reports (PDF) cover:

Trade marks contrary to public policy or accepted principles of morality

The distinctive character of slogans

Each report analyses the legal framework and case law of the CJEU, General Court and BoA, before drawing conclusions. In each case, the reports find that the Boards’ decision-making practice is highly consistent with the case law of the European courts and among the Boards.

The former sets out eight conclusions regarding marks contrary to public policy/accepted principles of morality. These include identifying the differences between the two values systems, the importance of contextual elements, the perspective of the relevant language-speaking public, the need to be directly offensive, any mitigating factors and that trade marks are not a constraint on freedom of expression. It also addressed marijuana and cannabis marks.

The latter found three conclusions: a slogan is objectionable when the public perceives it as a mere promotional formula; to be refused, it must be established that a sign will be perceived merely as a promotional slogan; and it is sufficient for registration for a slogan to set off a cognitive process in the minds of the relevant public which makes it easy to remember.

The reports also include useful lists of relevant cases from the courts and BoA.

Note that the reports do not have any binding effect on the BoA.