![IP-2024-000037 - [2025] EWHC 547 (IPEC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_AacSvIO.png){kind=logo}
The issues
The issues
The objections taken by Iceland to Babek’s trade mark all relate solely to the clarity and precision of the Trade Mark. The first, third and sixth seem to be about ambiguity said to be generated by inconsistencies between the visual representation and the written description. The second, fourth, fifth and sixth appear to be about both ambiguity and an alleged multitude of forms.
The principles of law set out in the authorities above that are relevant to the present case raise issues which can be shortly stated:
As of the date of registration was the registration ambiguous?
As of that date did the Trade Mark, correctly interpreted, have a multitude of forms?
Having regard to the foregoing, were all the Sieckmann criteria satisfied (i.e. the statutory requirements of clarity and precision plus the others listed in Sieckmann)?
- Heading
- Judge Hacon
- The claim
- Grounds of alleged invalidity
- The case law
- Colour per se marks
- Figurative and three-dimensional marks featuring colour
- Position marks
- The relevance of categorisation
- The statutory requirements
- A sign
- Capable of graphic representation – capable of being represented in the register
- Clarity and precision of protection
- Capacity to distinguish
- The effect of Brexit on the perception of clarity and precision
- Iceland’s arguments
- The issues
- Discussion
- Conclusions