Austria: The difficulties of establishing two trade marks

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

Austria: The difficulties of establishing two trade marks

Sponsored by

sonn-400px.png

During the time of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy, a famous hotel existed in Vienna. Its name was Meissl & Schadn and its restaurant was very well-known for its high-end beef dishes.

For some decades now, a well-known chain of restaurants in Vienna that specialises in high-quality beef dishes has existed. Its name is Plachutta.

In 2000 Plachutta registered the trade mark Meissl & Schadn in class 42 for the running of restaurants and cafés. It was for use as a secondary trade mark. In brochures, menus, its cookbooks and other material it purported to continue the tradition of the old Meissl & Schadn and saw itself as its successor.

A short time ago, a new hotel opened on the prestigious Ring with a fashionable old Viennese-style restaurant called Meissl & Schadn. This restaurant also specialises in traditional, high-end Viennese cooking, using beef as the basis of many of its dishes. The existence of the trade mark Meissl & Schadn registered in the name of an established, famous competitor posed too great a danger to the new business. As a result, a cancellation action was started on the basis of non-use.

Plachutta used the trade mark Meissl & Schadn solely in print and that too only in order to point to the tradition of Viennese beef cooking. The trade mark had no specific and concrete connections to certain services which would enable consumers to distinguish these services from those of other enterprises. However, this is the essence and purpose of trademarks. Consumers were not able to distinguish the origin of certain specific services by hearing or reading the trade mark Meissl & Schadn from the same services offered by others. Consequently, a trade mark was not established. The mere use of it as a reference to an old tradition did not suffice. The trade mark Meissl & Schadn was cancelled due to non-use.

Normally, restaurant services are carried out under the name of the restaurant and this is also its trademark. The above case shows the difficulties that arise when trying to establish a second trade mark.

sonn.jpg

Helmut Sonn



SONN & PARTNER Patentanwälte

Riemergasse 14

A-1010 Vienna, Austria

Tel: +43 1 512 84 05

Fax: +43 1 512 98 05

office@sonn.at

www.sonn.at

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

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
The IP boutique is betting that growing investment in quantum and semiconductors will fuel demand as technology shifts toward physical systems
Lawyers say the overhaul better reflects commercial reality, with changes spanning novelty searches, digital designs and access to a small claims track, but stopping short of criminalising unregistered design infringement
Carpmaels & Ransford hires its fourth partner of the year and wins access to UPC files, as fresh orders address costs, confidentiality and the use of divisional patents
Gift this article