Netherlands: Acquired distinctiveness in indivisible territory

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Cookies Settings

Netherlands: Acquired distinctiveness in indivisible territory

Of the total population of the Netherlands of 16.8 million people, 2.2 million have seen the final episode of the second season of "Heel Holland bakt". This makes it one of the most popular television shows in the Netherlands of the past few years.

"Heel Holland bakt" is the Dutch version of the British television hit show "The Great British Bake Off"; it could be translated as "the whole of Holland is baking". Although the Dutch show is very popular, the trade mark application for Heel Holland Bakt was refused by the Benelux Office for lack of distinctive character and descriptiveness.

Descriptiveness of a sign in one of the languages of the Benelux countries (French, Dutch or German) is a common problem for Benelux trade mark owners. So it is in this case. The Dutch wording "Heel Holland bakt" is not descriptive for the French speaking part of the Benelux public, but was found descriptive for the Dutch speaking public.

Fortunately, it is possible to get a descriptive sign registered in case it acquires distinctiveness after all. In order to prove acquired distinctiveness the applicant must demonstrate that the sign is perceived by the relevant public as a trade mark that distinguishes goods or services of the applicant through its very use. The Benelux Court of Justice has decided that a sign that was not distinctive originally can only be registered if acquired distinctiveness is demonstrated prior to the application date.

With respect to trade mark rights the Benelux countries are one indivisible territory. For proving acquired distinctiveness through use this could form a further complication. The point is that the Dutch speaking public does not only live in The Netherlands but also in a part of Belgium (Vlaanderen). As "Heel Holland bakt" is only used as a trade mark in the Netherlands (the Belgian counterpart of "The Great British Bake Off" being called "De Meesterbakker") problems occur.

A sign can only be registered based on acquired distinctiveness if the sign is qualified as a trade mark in the whole of Benelux. Therefore, acquired distinctiveness must always be demonstrated in the entire Benelux territory. So if a sign that is descriptive in Dutch is only used in Belgium, it will be very difficult to proof that the sign acquired distinctiveness in the whole of the Benelux.

However, there is an exception to this rule: if a trade mark has an inherent geographical boundary, acquired distinctiveness should only be proved within this specific territory.

For the case at hand, "Heel Holland bakt" this means that proof of intensive use in The Netherlands (Holland) alone is sufficient to get the mark registered. And that is exactly what happened with the trade mark Heel Holland bakt. The proof of intensive use changed the minds of the examiners of the Benelux Office and the mark is now registered for all goods and services applied for.

Most of the readers of this article will not very often be confronted with signs that are descriptive in Dutch, let alone marks that are only used in the Dutch speaking part of Belgium or in the Netherlands. It is much more common that a sign is filed as a trade mark which could be considered descriptive in English. For those trade mark owners it is important to keep in mind that the general Benelux public is sufficiently familiar with the English language. Assuming that the meaning of an English term is understood in every part of the Benelux territory, acquired distinctiveness has to be proven in every part of the Benelux

Witteman_Maaike-100

Maaike Witteman


V.O.Johan de Wittlaan 72517 JR The HagueThe NetherlandsTel: +31 70 416 67 11Fax: +31 70 416 67 99info@vo.euwww.vo.eu

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

IP boutique Petillion represented IKEA in the dispute, which concerned the use of the multinational’s trademarks in an immigration-focused campaign. The firm tells Managing IP how it secured the outcome
The Pizzeys-Griffith Hack integration was designed to create a stronger Australian IP platform but with several ex-Pizzeys principals now gone, the deal's success may depend on where clients place their trust
Thomas Lonsdale and Hsu Min Chung of HGF explore the practical impact of the EPO’s Enlarged Board of Appeal’s decision in G1/25 and its interplay with G1/24
The firm’s recent IP hire and launch of a new robotics industry group signal an effort to capture work emerging from AI entering the physical world
Another firm sets up shop in Dallas, bringing its patent disputes capabilities to one of the US’s busiest litigation venues
Entrepreneurial IP lawyers are still launching specialist firms, but increasingly with larger teams, broader coverage and greater infrastructure than the boutique model once implied
Jevon Louis explains how Covid led to a focus on local clients, discusses why mediation is successful in Singapore and reflects on the growing demand for AI advice
An increase in instructions from domestic companies and litigation for international clients are driving success for the Chinese IP firm, according to two lead partners
Ankur Sangal said he wants his team, nearly 30-strong already, to respond to a growing demand for specialist, commercially focused IP advice in a ‘rapidly evolving’ Indian market
As AI adoption accelerates across corporate IP departments, Simon Webster, president of IP at Clarivate, argues that success will depend less on technology alone and more on data quality, workflow design, and organisational readiness
Gift this article