Despite the trademark being registered with EUIPO, the competing company, Currency One S.A., filed a request with EUIPO to invalidate the aforementioned trademark. The main arguments in favor of invalidation were primarily: the descriptive nature of the trademark in question and its lack of distinctiveness. As a result, according to the competing company, the “Cinkciarz” trademark should be available to all entities operating in the financial services market.
Acknowledging the request for invalidation of the trademark in question, the Office initially rejected it, and subsequently, after an appeal was filed, also in the second instance (Board of Appeal). However, Currency One S.A. did not give up and filed a complaint with the Court of Justice of the European Union.
As a result, after the court reviewed the case, on December 19, 2019, a judgment was issued dismissing the complaint in this case, which is equivalent to Cinckiarz.pl’s success. In its reasoning, the Court of the European Union stated that it is difficult to consider that the disputed mark “Cinkciarz” has a descriptive character, and this is due to the fact that it does not define the currency exchange service, and even less so any profession related to it.
Regardless of the outcome, in the opinion of the authorized company’s attorneys, this decision shows that trademarks that define many different phenomena or practices (not necessarily legal) from the past can be very suitable as a trademark.
Fill out the form, and we will get back to you within the next 1-2 business days with a preliminary quote.
