Zara trademark saga: the Greek head comes to the surface

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

Zara trademark saga: the Greek head comes to the surface

Sponsored by

patrinos-logo.png
church-6982224.jpg

Manolis Metaxakis of Patrinos & Kilimiris reports on a notable judgment in the Zara trademark dispute, highlighting a radical provision in the relevant Greek legislation and the ruling’s alignment with EU case law

The dispute between Inditex, the Spanish fashion group, and Ffauf Italia SpA, the Italian food producer, has, not surprisingly, a Greek head as well. It is well known, after all, that the dispute resembles the Lernaean Hydra. In Greece, Inditex sought to have some of Ffauf’s national trademark registrations, relating to ‘Pasta Zara’, revoked on the basis of non-use.

The specialised division on intellectual property matters of the Athens Court of Appeal delivered a judgment in this respect on July 11 2024. Setting aside the legacy of the dispute, this judgment is notable because it is the fruit of the most radical provision of the Greek Law on Trademarks, No. 4679/2020.

According to that provision, all decisions on invalidity and revocation actions (but not on oppositions) filed and decided at the administrative level – that is to say, before/by the Hellenic Industrial Property Organisation – shall be reviewed by the civil courts; i.e., by the specialised divisions on intellectual property matters of the first-instance court and the Athens Court of Appeal.

As regards the merits of the case, the court emphasised that when assessing whether use of the trademark is genuine, regard must be had to all the facts and circumstances to assess whether the commercial exploitation of the mark in the course of trade is real. The court also clarified that it is sufficient that a trademark has been used during a part of the five-year period applicable for the trademark not to be subject to the sanctions of revocation.

Finally, it was held that the use of a trademark by a company that is economically linked to the proprietor of the mark is presumed to be use of that mark with the consent of the proprietor and is therefore to be deemed to constitute use by the proprietor.

This is in full line with EU case law, which served as a basis for the court to provide a well-reasoned judgment, bearing in mind that the court had to consider several types of evidence to assess whether the use concerned amounts to genuine use of the trademark registrations challenged.

It seems that the Greek legislator had a point with the aforementioned reform, which is good news for all cases, either with a domestic or international flair.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Deals between five more law firms and President Trump and an antitrust lawsuit against Amgen were also among the top talking points this week
US counsel explain how they win new cleantech IP business and how they’re navigating the industry’s challenges
Leaders at the IP firms, which have joined forces with backing from a PE investor, share their vision of building the number one pan-European IP practice
Firms will steer clients towards other ways of getting quicker examinations, but fear the ramifications of the USPTO’s decision
Melissa Haapala added that returning to client advocacy and the chance to work on patent litigation were reasons for returning to private practice
Michelle Clark, who has a generalist litigation background, plans to focus on IP disputes at Alston & Bird
Philips and Vivo have entered into a licensing agreement, putting an end to a five-year-old telecom SEP dispute in India
Stefan Müller discusses managing deadlines, the importance of reflection, and why IP is more than just a 'nice to have'
The three founders of the IP firm’s new US offering say they plan to offer a unique proposition in a market fixated by the billable hour
The opinion provides useful guidance when it comes to how courts might consider contributory infringement, DMCA claims, and other issues in AI copyright cases
Gift this article