4.4.3.1: Legal basis

Search the content

Table of Contents

The legal basis for the ground for refusal due to lack of distinctive character is Art. 6quinquies B No. 2 Paris Convention, Art. 4 I letter b MRR, Art. 7 I letter b UMV and § 8 II No. 1 MarkenG. However, these have different wording in German. While the MRR and UMV refer to trademarks “devoid of distinctive character”, the MarkenG is based on the wording of the Paris Convention and refers to trademarks that “lack any distinctive character”. However, the different text cannot justify a different legal assessment.[1] According to the twelfth recital of the MRR, it should be interpreted in the sense of the Paris Convention, which also applies to the text of the UMV, which is based on the wording of the MRR. In any case, the European Court of Justice and the Federal Court of Justice agree in practice that a minimum degree of distinctiveness is sufficient to remove the ground for refusal.[2]


Footnotes

  1. See also BGH GRUR 1995, 410 TURBO I; BGH GRUR 1996, 771, 772 THE HOME DEPOT; also see Starck, WRP 1996, 269, 270.

  2. See ECJ T-128/01 of March 6, 2003 Radiator grille, para. 33, with reference to ECJ T-34/00 of February 27, 2002 EUROCOOL, para. 39; also ECJ T-320/03 of September 15, 2005 LIVE RICHLY, para. 68; ECJ T-123/04 of September 27, 2005 CARGO PARTNER, para. 45; BGH GRUR 1999, 1093, 1094 FOR YOU; BGH GRUR 2000, 502, 503 St. Pauli Girl; BGH GRUR 2000, 722, 723 LOGO; BGH GRUR 2001, 56, 57 Likörflasche; BGH GRUR 2001, 1150 LOOK; BGH I ZB 37/04 v. 24.5.2007 Fronthaube Tz. 23; I ZB 36/04 v. 24.5.2007, Tz. 23; I ZB 34/08 v. 22.1.2009 My World, para. 10; BGH I ZB 62/09 of 31.3.2010 Marlene-Dietrich-Bildnis II, para. 13; also Begründung zum Regierungsentwurf, BT-Dr. 12/6581, p. 70 = BlPMZ 1994, Sonderheft, p. 64.