A recent decision of the UKIPO registrar emphasises the importance of filing notice of defence and counterstatement forms within the specified deadline.

In what appears to be a first for Slovenia, the Ljubljana Circuit Court has replaced four categories listed in international TESLA registrations with smaller subcategories, without explicit request from either party.

The marks SAVOY and TORONTO, which are registered in Nestlé’s name in several other countries, were found to be widely recognised in Ecuador.

The decision is interesting in that the Board of Appeal took judicial notice of many “well-known facts” concerning the jewellery sector.

The court dismissed Google’s argument that the initial letter ‘G’ in its GPAY mark played a significant distinctive – and potentially dominant – role in that mark.

This dispute between Nestlé and A2 Milk serves as a valuable example of how the Chinese courts will assess distinctiveness.

If enacted, the proposal promises to offer specialised and consistent adjudication of IP cases, ultimately benefitting stakeholders.

In this dispute between competing breweries Anheuser-Busch and Amstel, the court found that ‘ultra’ was a generic, laudatory term which was incapable of differentiating the commercial origin of the goods.

This decision of the EUIPO’s Grand Board may be seen as a ‘high-water mark’ in applying the Article 7 absolute grounds for refusal.

When assessing the evidence of genuine use, individual pieces of evidence should not be analysed in isolation, but together, in order to identify their most likely and coherent significance.