The restaurant owner from Zutphen disagrees, claiming that over 800 companies are registered at the Chamber of Commerce using this name, so the name is free to be used by everybody. Furthermore, the logos are different, as are the cities where the parties are established and for these reasons, there is no risk of confusion.
The judge does not agree, stating that the dominant part of both logo’s is the word ‘encounter’ and that the offered services are identical. It does not matter that the restaurants are 50 kilometers apart. Both companies direct themselves to the same audience through internet. Therefore, the consumers might think that the restaurant in Zutphen is a new establishment of the same owner in another city. In the end, the party from Zutphen has to change their name and, as the losing party, pay for the legal expenses of the other.10