On 1 June 2012, BOEHMERT & BOEHMERT partner and trademark expert Dr Florian Schwab makes a guest contribution to the magazine LebensmittelZeitung entitled “Only one of many” (Nur einer unter anderen). Here, he looks at the decision of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in relation to the EU-wide trademark protection for the Lindt chocolate bunny. Registration of the golden bunny with the red ribbon as 3D community mark was rejected by the Court as not capable of registration. Dr Florian Schwab comments: “The judgement shows, generally it is difficult for a product shape as such to find original trademark protection at EU level. The bunny shape cannot claim trademark protection. The judgement of the ECJ is also significant for its restrictive tendency in respect of the community trademark.” Those subscribing to LebensmittelZeitung can see the entire article here.

In the 04/2012 edition of GRUR-Prax from 17th February, BOEHMERT & BOEHMERT partner and attorney Dr Rudolf Böckenholt has provided a comment on the decision made by the Federal Court of Justice on 17th August 2011 regarding the “akustilon” case. This high-court decision states that in trade mark cancellation proceedings at the German Patent and Trade Mark Office, it is not a deciding factor whether or not the registered owner is actually also the owner of the trade mark, or whether this still even exists. This is to be assumed in the official procedure, and examined only in any potential action for trade mark cancellation before the ordinary courts (state courts). This question has previously not had a uniform answer in the case law or the literature of industrial property law. The first civil senate of the Federal Court of Justice responsible for trade mark law now draws on general procedural case law. Since 2009, Dr Böckenholt has been a regular contributor to GRUR-Prax. The article can be viewed by subscribers at.

Writing in the online edition of the World Trademark Review Daily on 2 December 2011, BOEHMERT & BOEHMERT partner and trademark expert Dr Florian Schwab has commented on the decision by the European Court of Justice in the Buffalo Milke Automotive Polishing Products Inc. vs. Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market (OHIM) case. The decision deals with the question of right-preserving usage, a matter very relevant in practice and as yet treated with some irregularity in the case law of the European courts. Here, the case deals with requirements placed on usage documents submitted on appeal.