This judgment provides clear support for the view that the red cross device is reserved specifically for the use of the Red Cross organization and that hospitals and clinics may not use that device or any other which can be confusingly similar to it or which lead to any association with it. 

The following are some of the important conclusions that may be drawn from the judgment:

- The Red Cross emblem is a sign protected under an international convention and Spain, having ratified that treaty, must observe it. There is no place for the argument that the red cross is a generic element or something of that kind.

- Moreover, "the prominent work and activities of the Cruz Roja ... may not be used against its interests, as though that were something which could attenuate the protection that the emblem should be afforded, but must, in contrast, invariably be regarded as a factor which should prompt a stricter assessment of any sign that could give rise to confusion or association with that emblem”.

- It is immaterial that the device appearing in the contested trade mark is not precisely identical to a cross and is described as consisting of “symmetrical angular lines facing one another at their vertices, which are rounded”.

- Nor may it be claimed that to place the name of the hospital or clinic beside the emblem averts the likelihood of association with the Cruz Roja, given that the public “could be led to think that the hospital group or the building concerned was connected with the Cruz Roja".

- "It is not so much a relative as an absolute prohibition on registration that has to be applied here".

- Lastly, “the use in connection with health related services of devices more or less similar to the cross in red should be permitted only when all likelihood of confusion with the Cruz Roja emblem may be ruled out”.

Class 46 thanks its good friend Miguel Angel Medina (Elzaburu) for this information.  Disclaimer: Miguel Angel acted for the Red Cross organization throughout this dispute.