On 9th January 2003, in the case of Davidoff & Cie SA and Zino Davidoff SA v Gofkid Ltd, the ECJ delivered an unexpected judgment of potentially great significance to holders of trade marks who would seek to protect reputation in those marks against so called ‘dilution’. The ECJ held that current anti-dilution measures, which protect well-known trade marks on goods from similar or identical signs being used by third parties on dissimilar goods can be extended to protect use of similar and identical signs on similar goods even where no confusion has resulted.
The facts
Davidoff has the word mark and device, Davidoff, registered in Germany for goods in classes 14 and 34 including various tobacco products and gentlemen’s accessories. Gofkid is the proprietor of the word mark and device, Durffee, which was registered in Germany after the Davidoff marks for various goods also in classes 14 and 34. Both marks were in the same script and the distinctive ‘D’ and ‘ff’ in the two device
