Jägermeister’s Hubertus deer vs silhouette head of a Hubertus deer

Les Bordes Golf Club uses a silhouette of the head of a Hubertus deer for their logo. When they file EU trademark protection for this sign, Mast-Jägermeister opposes, invoking its registered logo. This has been registered for a wide range of identical products and services. The EUIPO initially rules that the trademarks don’t infringe, but Jägermeister appeals successfully at the EUIPO’s Board of Appeal.


The silhouette is almost identical to the shape of the head of the Hubertus deer and this constitutes the dominant part. The circle and the cross are mere decoration. The added verbal element LES BORDES is deemed insufficient to compensate for this similarity. As the golf club logo has been requested for identical goods and services, there is a possibility of confusion. The trademark is therefore refused.


Latest news
NFT: trademark registrations in the metaverse
Volkswagen trumps cult camper
Adidas: bare breasts and sports bras
Yoko Ono and John Lemon gin
Barbie tackles copycat
Our Clients
Follow Abcor

IP quiz Trademarks

Puma is one of the bigger sports and lifestyle brands in the world. The core-business is the design, development and sale of (sports) shoes, (sports) clothing and accessories. In 1960, Puma registered an international trademark for a device designed in 1958: the formstrip. Since then, Puma has registered approximately 90 formstrip trademarks with validity in the Benelux or the European Union. Puma claims that this is a serial mark. Monshoe is a wholesaler of women's shoes and related products. The company designs and develops Monshoe shoes which it largely markets itself. Monshoe sells its women's shoes under the brands Shoecolate and Pearlz. The shoe Shoecolate is offered in various colour combinations. Puma claims that Monshoe infringes its well-known formstrip trademark. Monshoe contradicts this and states that the average consumer will not perceive the device of Monshoe on the sneakers as a trademark. And if the public will recognize a trademark in the decoration, it will not make the connection to Puma. According to Monshoe, the formstrip logo is not a well-known trademark within the meaning of the BVIE and the UMVo. There is no likelihood of confusion because the sign does not or hardly evoke any association with Puma among the public. In light of the above, who is right? Does this constitute decorative use or linking to a well-known trademark?