Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 8 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

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

Austria: The difficulties of establishing two trade marks

Sponsored by


During the time of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy, a famous hotel existed in Vienna. Its name was Meissl & Schadn and its restaurant was very well-known for its high-end beef dishes.

For some decades now, a well-known chain of restaurants in Vienna that specialises in high-quality beef dishes has existed. Its name is Plachutta.

In 2000 Plachutta registered the trade mark Meissl & Schadn in class 42 for the running of restaurants and cafés. It was for use as a secondary trade mark. In brochures, menus, its cookbooks and other material it purported to continue the tradition of the old Meissl & Schadn and saw itself as its successor.

A short time ago, a new hotel opened on the prestigious Ring with a fashionable old Viennese-style restaurant called Meissl & Schadn. This restaurant also specialises in traditional, high-end Viennese cooking, using beef as the basis of many of its dishes. The existence of the trade mark Meissl & Schadn registered in the name of an established, famous competitor posed too great a danger to the new business. As a result, a cancellation action was started on the basis of non-use.

Plachutta used the trade mark Meissl & Schadn solely in print and that too only in order to point to the tradition of Viennese beef cooking. The trade mark had no specific and concrete connections to certain services which would enable consumers to distinguish these services from those of other enterprises. However, this is the essence and purpose of trademarks. Consumers were not able to distinguish the origin of certain specific services by hearing or reading the trade mark Meissl & Schadn from the same services offered by others. Consequently, a trade mark was not established. The mere use of it as a reference to an old tradition did not suffice. The trade mark Meissl & Schadn was cancelled due to non-use.

Normally, restaurant services are carried out under the name of the restaurant and this is also its trademark. The above case shows the difficulties that arise when trying to establish a second trade mark.


Helmut Sonn

SONN & PARTNER Patentanwälte

Riemergasse 14

A-1010 Vienna, Austria

Tel: +43 1 512 84 05

Fax: +43 1 512 98 05

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

A Foss Patents blog post revealed that Mr Justice Marcus Smith handed down his judgment in Optis v Apple on May 10
Witnesses during a committee hearing criticised proposals to increase some fees by as much as 400%
Sources say they are likely to hire external counsel that can create a lasting first impression but will likely turn their backs on lawyers who have nothing new to offer
Varuni Paranavitane, of counsel at Finnegan, examines recent decisions by US and UK courts to demonstrate the proof of infringement that was required
The Federal Circuit will also narrow its investigation into Judge Newman to focus on whether her failure to cooperate constitutes misconduct
The management board will send three names to the Council of the EU for a final decision
Sources say a decision by the IP High Court will make it easier for rights owners to fight infringement
Seán Kelly asked the European Commission how it intends to ensure the EUIPO executive director vote, due tomorrow, will be fair and transparent
Counsel from BMW and Finnegan explain how they got an NPE to sign a covenant agreeing not to sue the automaker ever again
The blue checkmark could be a good tool, but it’s unclear how widespread its adoption will be, say in-house sources