Fraudulent invoices – rascals in jail

In our profession, fraudulent or misleading invoices remain an ineradicable evil, which is spreading all over Europe. It is important that companies file a report (in the Netherlands there is a specialised helpdesk, Nationale Fraude Helpdesk info@fraudehelpdesk.nl) in case they are victimised. Only then, it will be clear to everybody, how high the damages actually are.

Fortunately, there is some occasional success in this battle as well. A good example is a case in Sweden. For three years misleading invoices were sent to companies all over Europe. The invoices appeared to have been sent by the EUIPO. The High Court in Sweden stated that the victims had been misled. The two main suspects in this case were sentenced to 5 and 3 years imprisonment. Hopefully, new legislation will be introduced in the Netherlands to tackle this scum swiftly, fully and easily. Until then, don’t be embarrassed and report every payment of a misleading invoice to the appropriate authorities.

other-general

Latest news
The Bulldog rightly claims damages from Red Bull
Trademark Escobar parfum contrary to public order
Abcor team in World Trademark Review 1000
Louis Keijzer passes BBMM exam with flying colours
Competitor registers domain name
Our Clients
Follow Abcor
claimant
defendant
claimant
defendant

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?