A new approach to TM infringement?

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

A new approach to TM infringement?

Is the infringement test under Article 5 of the EU Trade Mark Directive so complex that an alternative approach would be better?

That question, posed by Roland Mallinson of Taylor Wessing, sparked considerable debate at the 26th annual MARQUES conference, held in Athens last week.

Speaking in a panel on “Exceptional Signs”, Mallinson discussed referential use of trade marks, in particular where the same mark and same goods/services are concerned.

Citing cases such as Adam Opel, Interflora and Bellure, he suggested that the infringement test established by the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) has become too complex. A better approach might be to make the infringement test clearer and then clarify the defences available.

This would be in line with suggestions made in the Max Planck report, said Mallinson.

That report is now being considered by the European Commission as it prepares recommendations for changes to the Trade Mark Directive and Trade Mark Regulation. However, the proposals have been delayed and now may not be public until next year.

The MARQUES conference attracted over 600 attendees and the theme of the educational sessions was “Sign of the Times”.

Other panels addressed the challenges posed by technological developments such as augmented reality-based advertising and Google Goggles; non-traditional marks; enforcement, particularly online; domain name developments; and recent CJEU case law.

There were also presentations from WIPO and OHIM and workshops on topics including traditional knowledge and plain packaging, as well as excursions and receptions featuring Greek food and culture.

Detailed reports from the conference are available on the MARQUES Class 46 blog.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Eight years after its launch, members of the Australian patent firm’s Singapore office explain its growth strategy over the past year
Lawyers at Bowmans Kenya discuss the digital blind spots posed by the transition from physical ledgers to cloud databases and digital co-development models
The Powell Gilbert co-founder discusses the confidence required to launch a firm, building an enduring patent litigation practice and why developing the next generation has changed her measure of success
Cabinet M Oproiu’s Raluca Vasilescu explains why AI is changing what clients expect from patent attorneys, where the technology is overhyped and what the next generation will need to do differently
As clients demand more flexible fees and AI-driven efficiencies, IP firms are rethinking pricing without abandoning the value of their work
HG Law was formed largely by ex Fish & Neave lawyers who left after the latter's merger with Ropes & Gray; now those experiences are shaping its latest combination
David Rodrigues and Evan Lazerowitz – attorneys at Robinson & Cole – offer practical guidance on the steps a business might consider to preserve and maximise IP value before entering financial distress or insolvency
Daniel Law CEO Alicia Daniel-Shores may have stepped into a family business, but she has spent two decades building her own vision around technology and litigation
Law firms don't particularly like saying no to clients. Perhaps they should get better at it
The office, which has a relatively new patent litigation team as well as a wider ‘soft’ IP offering, would remain independent if the rejection is rubberstamped
Gift this article