Greek Trademark Office rejects application containing the word ‘Jesus’

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

Greek Trademark Office rejects application containing the word ‘Jesus’

Sponsored by

patrinos-logo.png
church-2020258.jpg

Evangelia Sioumala of Patrinos & Kilimiris reports on the rejection of a trademark application on absolute grounds because it was considered to contain a word of high symbolic importance

The Greek Law on Trademarks provides that a trademark shall not be registered or, if registered, shall be liable to be declared invalid where the trademark includes a sign of high symbolic value; in particular, a religious symbol.

The Greek Trademark Office, in a decision issued in 2023, held that the trademark below (international classes 30 and 43) should be refused registration, as it contains the word “Jesus”.

The Greek examiner also ruled that the figurative element of the trademark at issue, consisting of two praying hands, is of high symbolic value.

The decision is consistent with previous rulings of the Greek Trademark Office, in which other trademarks – such as the second image in the gallery below, containing the symbol of the cross – were rejected on the same basis.

In a similar case, the EUIPO Board of Appeal considered that the sign of a Latin cross, as depicted in the third image below, is contrary to public policy under Article 7(1)(f) of the EU Trademark Regulation (EUTMR).

In this context, it was held that Christian religions have had, and continue to have, an influence in Europe and that religious beliefs should be respected. It was also stated that “the fact that religious symbols of very high symbolic value are becoming commonplace as a result of their commercialisation could offend the sensitivities of both believers and non-believers in the European Union who also have the right not to be exposed to the proliferation of such symbols, used as trademarks in everyday life”.

Although the absolute ground of refusal applicable is not the same, the outcome is, which is not strange, since it is acceptable that absolute grounds of refusal may well overlap. This is the case as far as the Greek law is concerned, where both grounds of refusal are provided for. However, when the EUTMR comes into play, all relevant cases can be dealt with on a single-ground basis, that of Article 7(1)(f).

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Counsel at five US firms explain how they get less experienced attorneys ready for conducting oral arguments
Tesla and Avanci’s FRAND battle, a boost for UK artists concerning royalty payments and lawyer moves involving White & Case and Fieldfisher were among the top talking points
Finnegan partners outline how the firm determines whether AI tools are safe to use and if they are a worthwhile investment
Bill Braunlin was drawn to the firm because of its work with start-ups and universities, as well as its employees’ industry experience
Melissa Anyetei discusses how she’s building her practice and reveals the challenges of working at a larger firm
Lawyers at Aksoy IP discuss why a delay in implementing a new procedure for cancelling trademarks in Türkiye is causing a headache for practitioners
Private equity firms explain how external funding and expertise can help IP firms and reveal what they look for before investing
Our latest UPC update covers first-instance decisions, upcoming hearings, and other significant developments
Managing IP goes behind the scenes to uncover what happens when setting up an SEP licensing programme for electric vehicle chargers, and discovers why law firms play a crucial role
Exclusive data and in-house analysis show that law firms are able to respond quickly when engaging with in-house clients but struggle to make the grade when it comes to the quality of their answers
Gift this article