Dr. Julian Wernicke in GRUR Prax 13/2026 on the General Court’s decision in “LAMUCCA v. MUKA”

The General Court’s decision in “LAMUCCA v. MUKA” (T-390/25) provides interesting clarifications regarding the likelihood of confusion in the context of service marks, the weight given to phonetic similarities between marks, and the significance of foreign-language terminology in trademark practice.

In his article „LAMUCCA gegen MUKA: Verwechslungsgefahr durch Klangnähe bei Dienstleistungsmarken“ (LAMUCCA v. MUKA: Likelihood of Confusion Due to Phonetic Similarity in Service Marks) in GRUR Prax 13/2026, Julian Wernicke, an attorney at law at BOEHMERT & BOEHMERT, analyzes the decision of the General Court of the European Union in the case “LAMUCCA v. MUKA,” in which the court confirmed the invalidity of the EU figurative mark MUKA due to a likelihood of confusion with the earlier Spanish mark LAMUCCA.

The ruling makes it clear that even where there is only a slight visual similarity, a high degree of phonetic similarity may be sufficient to establish a likelihood of confusion. In the conceptual comparison of trademarks, meanings in foreign languages may be taken into account only if they are actually understood by a significant portion of the relevant public. Furthermore, the court clarifies the requirements for proving use of service marks that preserves the rights associated with them.

The full article by Julian Wernicke, which includes helpful practical guidance, is available here in German to registered users of Beck Online.