Greece: Trademark used in trade prevails over the registered form

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

Greece: Trademark used in trade prevails over the registered form

Sponsored by

patrinos-logo.png
bibake-uppal-83ug2s0at-i-unsplash.jpg

Evangelia Sioumala of Patrinos & Kilimiris looks at a recent judgment from the Athens Administrative Court of First Instance that favours the verbal elements of a trademark

In a trademark cancellation action for non-use, an issue of high significance for the trademark owners may come into play: Is there a genuine use of a registered trademark that consists of both verbal and figurative elements, when the latter is omitted while used in trade?

81adab5f608f4102af9ead0addb81627

In a recent case brought before the Athens Administrative Court of First Instance, the contested trademark consisted of the stylised word ‘JAGUAR’ and an image of the wild cat commonly known as a jaguar (Figure 1). It was argued accordingly that the owner of the contested trademark had failed to prove genuine use of the trademark, since all evidence submitted were related solely to the stylised word ‘JAGUAR’, while the figurative feature was missing (Figure 2).

The court held that the said omission does not alter the distinctive character of the trademark at issue. The court further clarified that the omitted figurative element conceptually illustrates the existing stylised word of the trademark. Thus, the word prevails, and the figurative element is a mere accessory.

The ruling is in line with EU case law, where it is correct to say that the average consumer will more easily refer to the goods in question by quoting their name rather than by referring to the figurative element of the trademark. Moreover, it would be unjust to impose a requirement for strict conformity between the form used in trade and the form in which the trademark was registered. In that sense, the trademark owner is reasonably allowed to make variations of its trademark in the course of trade, without altering the mark’s distinctive character, which further enables the mark to be better adapted to the marketing and promotion requirements.

In view of the above, there seems to be a preference to the verbal elements of a trademark, at least in cases where the figurative ones conceptually denote the verbal ones. It is nevertheless doubtful, whether the contested trademark would still survive the non-use attack, if the figurative element omitted was to serve a concept other than the one of the verbal feature.

 

Evangelia Sioumala

Associate, Patrinos & Kilimiris

E: esioumala@patrinoskilimiris.com

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Attorneys explain why there are early signs that the US Supreme Court could rule in favour of ISP Cox in a copyright dispute
A swathe of UPC-related hires suggests firms are taking the forum seriously, as questions over the transitional stage begin
A win for Nintendo in China and King & Spalding hiring a prominent patent litigator were also among the top talking points
Rebecca Newman at Addleshaw Goddard, who live-reported on the seminal dispute, unpicks the trials and tribulations of the case and considers its impact
Attorneys predict how Lululemon’s trade dress and design patent suit against Costco could play out
Lawyers at Linklaters analyse some of the key UPC trends so far, and look ahead to life beyond the transition period
David Rodrigues, who previously worked at an IP boutique, said he may become more involved in transactional work at his new firm
Indian smartphone maker Lava must pay $2.3 million as a security deposit for past sales, as its dispute with Dolby over audio coding SEPs plays out
Powell Gilbert’s opening in Düsseldorf, complete with a new partner hire, continues this summer’s trend of UPC-related lateral movement
IP leaders at Brandsmiths and Bird & Bird, who were on opposing sides at the UK Supreme Court in Iconix v Dream Pairs, unpick the landmark case and its ramifications
Gift this article