EU IP offices clarify Nice Class Heading questions

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

EU IP offices clarify Nice Class Heading questions

Applicants for trade marks in Europe have been given new guidance about how they use general indications of the Nice Class headings in their applications

The guidance, contained in an updated version of OHIM’s Manual on Trade Mark Practice, follows a decision by the Court of Justice of the EU in IP Translator.

In June last year the Court ruled that trade mark applicants in Europe must identify goods and services “with sufficient clarity and precision” so that examiners and other businesses can determine the extent of protection “on that basis alone”.

Since then, EU IP offices, Switzerland’s IPI, Norway’s NIPO, user associations and OHIM have been working on a common position on the interpretation of the Nice Class headings and the acceptability of general indications of the Nice Class headings.

Now they have agreed a second Common Communication setting out a list of 11 general indications which lack clarity and precision, requiring further specification. These include Class 6 (Goods of common metal not included in other classes) and Class 7 (Machines and machine tools).

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

The UK-India trade deal doesn’t mention legal services, showing India has again failed to agree on a move that could help foreign firms and local practitioners
Eva-Maria Strobel reveals some of the firm’s IP achievements and its approach to client relationships
Lateral hires at Thompson Hine and Pierson Ferdinand said they were inspired by fresh business opportunities and innovative strategies at their new firms
The launch of a new IP insurance product and INTA hiring a former USPTO commissioner were also among the top talking points this week
The firm explains how it secured a $170.6 million verdict against the government in a patent dispute surrounding airport technology, and why the case led to interest from other inventors
Developments of note included the court partially allowing a claim concerning confidentiality clubs and a decision involving technology used in football matches
The firm said adding capability in the French capital completes its coverage of all major patent litigation jurisdictions as it strives for UPC excellence
Marc Fenster explains how keeping the jury focused on the most relevant facts helped secure a $279m win for his client against Samsung
Clients are divided on what externally funded IP firms bring to the table, so those firms must prove why the benefits outweigh the downsides
Rahul Bhartiya, AI coordinator at the EUIPO, discusses the office’s strategy, collaboration with other IP offices, and getting rid of routine tasks
Gift this article