Region: Switzerland

The Swiss Federal Administrative Court has dismissed an appeal against a decision of the Federal Institute of Intellectual Property which refused to register the trademark HYDE PARK for Classes 12 and 28 of the Nice Classification as it was qualified as deceptive to consumers if the goods were not British.

01 March 2016

Featured in Designs 2016: A Global Guide

Design law in Switzerland is governed by the Federal Design Act (2001) and the Ordinance to the Federal Design Act, which contains subsidiary provisions regarding the application and registration procedure before the Swiss Institute of Intellectual Property.

14 December 2015

The Federal Supreme Court has upheld a decision of the Commercial Court of the Canton of Aargau in which the latter had held that there was likelihood of confusion between the trade names MIPA Baumatec AG and Mipa Lacke + Farben AG. Among other things, the Federal Supreme Court noted the notion of 'likelihood of confusion' should be given the same interpretation with regard to the comparison of both trademarks and trade names.

04 December 2015

The Federal Administrative Court has reversed a decision of the Swiss Federal Institute of Intellectual Property in which the latter had upheld an opposition by the owner of the earlier registered mark MAMABEL against the registration of the mark MAMARELLA for similar goods. According to the court, the fact that the earlier mark MAMABEL had only a weak distinctive character was decisive in this case.

12 November 2015

The Federal Administrative Court has upheld a decision of the Federal Institute of Intellectual Property refusing to register the trademark TEUTONIA (Latin for ‘Germany’) in Classes 12, 18, 20 and 25 on the ground that it was deceptive for goods not originating from Germany. Among other things, the court held that, since all the goods at issue might be produced in Germany, the mark would be deceptive if the goods were not produced there.

29 September 2015

The basic principles for trademark protection in Switzerland are contained in the Federal Act on the Protection of Trademarks and Geographical Indications and the Trademarks Regulation, both of which have been repeatedly revised. The legislation is largely in harmony with the former EU First Trademarks Directive (89/104/EEC)

18 September 2015

The Swiss Federal Administrative Court had held that there was no likelihood of confusion between Yves Saint Laurent’s registered monogram YSL and the figurative trademark SL SKINNY LOVE. Among other things, the court confirmed that, with regard to short signs and acronyms, changing, omitting or adding just one letter can result in a different overall impression.

03 September 2015

The Federal Administrative Court has allowed an appeal against a decision of the Federal Institute of Intellectual Property in which the latter had refused to allow the registration of Lindt’s mark FROSCHKÖNIG ('Frog King') for various chocolate goods in Class 30. The court found that the mark was distinctive and did not need to be kept free for use by competitors.

21 July 2015

The Administrative Tribunal has overturned a decision of the Federal Institute of Intellectual Property in which the latter had found that there was no likelihood of confusion between the figurative mark DERMACLINIQUE and the word mark CLINIQUE. Among other things, the tribunal held that the protection of the mark CLINIQUE extended to the word element 'clinique' in the DERMACLINIQUE mark.

07 May 2015

The Federal Administrative Court has reversed a decision of the Federal Institute of Intellectual Property in which the latter had refused to register the trademark STRELA for non-Swiss goods on the grounds that the mountain Strela was an indirect geographical indication for the whole of Switzerland. The decision is good news for trademark owners, but there is still a long way to go before the Swiss practice on GIs is in line with international standards.

30 April 2015