Greek Trademark Office rejects application containing the word ‘Jesus’

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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 SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

IP STARS, Managing IP’s accreditation title, reveals its latest rankings for patent work, including which firms are moving up
Leaders at US law firms explain what attorneys can learn from AI cases involving Meta and Anthropic, and why the outcomes could guide litigation strategies
Attorneys reveal the trademark and copyright trends they’ve noticed within the first half of 2025
Senior leaders at TE Connectivity and Clarivate explain how they see the future of innovation
A new action filed by Nokia against Asus and a landmark ruling on counterfeits by South Africa’s Supreme Court were also among the top talking points
Counsel explain how they’re navigating patent prosecution matters and highlight key takeaways from Federal Circuit cases
A partner who joined Fenwick alongside two others explains what drew her to the firm and her hopes for growth in Boston
The England and Wales High Court has granted Kirkland & Ellis client Samsung interim declaratory relief in its ongoing FRAND dispute with ZTE
A UDRP decision that found in favour of a small business in a domain name dispute could encourage more businesses to take a stand in ‘David v Goliath’ cases
In Iconix v Dream Pairs, the Supreme Court said the Court of Appeal was wrong to interfere with an earlier ruling, prompting questions about the appeal court’s remit
Gift this article