Iceland supermarket loses EUTM battle with country of Iceland
Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX
Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

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

Iceland supermarket loses EUTM battle with country of Iceland

Iceland news-comp.jpg

The EUIPO’s Grand Board of Appeal found that the marks suggested the supermarket’s goods and services originated from Iceland

The UK supermarket Iceland has lost its high-profile EU trademark battle with the country of Iceland, the EUIPO confirmed today, December 21.

The EUIPO’s Grand Board of Appeal (GBoA) held that although nothing prevented the registration of country names as trademarks, the registration of those names should be assessed carefully.

In its decision, handed down on December 15 but published today, the GBoA said it was particularly mindful of the fact that Iceland was a member of the European Economic Area, with deep economic, historical and socio-cultural ties to the EU.

The board said Iceland’s manufacturing capacity, combined with the fact that the country produced a wide range of goods and had sought to expand its foreign trade, worked in its favour.

Further, the country’s fame made it reasonable, credible, and plausible to assume that the EU public would perceive the EUTMs as descriptive of the geographical origin rather than indicative of commercial origin.

The GBoA’s finding upheld an earlier decision by the First Board of Appeal.

The case has become one of the most talked about trademark disputes in recent years.

In 2019, the EUIPO’s Cancellation Division invalidated two EUTMs for ‘Iceland’, owned by UK supermarket Iceland Foods, on the basis that they were descriptive of the geographical origin of the goods and services.

Iceland’s government and two non-governmental agencies had joined forces to invalidate the marks.

Iceland Foods appealed against the finding, after which the EUIPO’s First BoA referred the case to the GBoA.

The case was one of only a handful at the EUIPO opposition level – and the first at the GBoA – in which an oral hearing was conducted.

Although a smattering of oral hearings has been held at the lower boards, every case at the GBoA had been conducted without oral arguments, until the Iceland spat.

Speaking to Managing IP after the hearing, which took place in September, counsel said the oral hearing worked well and should be used again in the future.

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

An intimate understanding of a client’s sector is essential to winning new business, a survey of over 28,000 corporate counsel reveals
Counsel say a Federal Circuit ruling on the obviousness test for design patents may increase the time IP owners spend defending their rights
While the INTA Annual Meeting is over for another year, here are a few things Managing IP learned after attending IP’s biggest party
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Four sources reveal which tools they have been using – or building – to help them with a range of tasks from invention generation to claim sufficiency
Managing IP reveals Wednesday's highlights, including a discussion on how AI is helping lawyers improve their "gut instinct" trademark decisions
Managing IP reveals Tuesday’s highlights, including an illuminating discussion celebrating women in the workplace and the challenges that remain
Dana Northcott, INTA’s 2024 president and associate general counsel for Amazon's IP team, talks about her work for the association
Managing IP reveals highlights from the INTA Annual Meeting, including law firms’ diversity and ESG concerns and a new beginning for a Chinese firm
Firms with a broad geographic reach are more likely to win work, especially from global companies with high turnovers, according to survey data of nearly 29,000 corporate counsel
Gift this article