Search for: "Nestle SA"
Results 21 - 40
of 76
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Jun 2017, 11:36 pm
On 30 January 2015, ECC sued Nestlé Nespresso SA and two other companies (DKB Household Switzerland AG and Eugster/Frismag AG) before the Swiss Federal Patent Court. [read post]
17 Mar 2019, 7:15 am
In the case of Nestlé Colombia v. [read post]
21 Jan 2014, 3:25 pm
”Nestlé appealed. [read post]
31 May 2017, 1:09 am
As a basic primer for the case, Societe Des Produits Nestle SA v Cadbury UK Ltd concerned the application to register the shape of the KitKat chocolate bar made by Nestle (TM 2552692), which comprised of a four-fingered bar with no markings on the surface (although commonly includes the KitKat logo on each finger). [read post]
14 Sep 2016, 2:24 am
Omega SA (Omega AG) (Omega LTD.) v. [read post]
21 Jan 2016, 12:59 am
the debate around the the-dimensional marks.By way of a short introduction, the case of Société Des Produits Nestlé SA v Cadbury UK Ltd dealt with the arguably iconic Kit Kat chocolate bar. [read post]
23 Dec 2014, 2:46 pm
It's only now that this Kat has caught up with Unilever Plc v Société des Produits Nestlé SA, a decision of Dermot Doyle, on behalf of the Controller of the Irish Patents Office which dates back to 12 September. [read post]
1 Jul 2013, 8:06 am
A generous katpat goes to aspiring young barrister Katherine Moggridge (a pupil at 3 New Square: both a Kat and a Mog, which scores pretty well on this weblog) for alerting the Kats to a recent decision of the United Kingdom's Trade Mark Registry: it's O-237-13 Société des Produuits Nestlé SA's application; opposition of Cadbury UK Ltd, a ruling on 20 June from none other than Katfriend Allan James. [read post]
11 Nov 2015, 1:30 am
As a result the ECJ handed down its judgment in September this year.The case of Société Des Produits Nestlé SA v Cadbury UK Ltd (European Court of Justice) dealt with an application for a trademark by Nestle for a three-dimensional representation of the Kit Kat bar, omitting the embossed words "Kit Kat" from the top of the chocolate bar's individual fingers. [read post]
26 Oct 2010, 6:26 am
No other Nestlé products are impacted.Source: http://www.examiner.com/product-recall-in-national/raisinets-recall-lot-numbers-nestle-recalls-raisinets-candy [read post]
9 Nov 2017, 9:34 pm
”CommentsThis case might not resonate with supporters of the decision of the Supreme Court of Appeal in Société des Produits Nestlé SA v International Foodstuffs [2014] ZASCA 187. [read post]
20 Sep 2022, 1:30 am
Nevertheless, color marks have always been difficult to register, however, in a highly anticipated victory Cadbury have done just that, potentially putting this matter to bed once and for all.The case of Societe des Produits Nestle SA v Cadbury UK Ltd concerned an appeal against a decision by the UKIPO Hearing Officer, in which they rejected the registration of three trademarks (specifically applications 3019362, 3025822 and 3019361). [read post]
20 Sep 2022, 1:30 am
Nevertheless, color marks have always been difficult to register, however, in a highly anticipated victory Cadbury have done just that, potentially putting this matter to bed once and for all.The case of Societe des Produits Nestle SA v Cadbury UK Ltd concerned an appeal against a decision by the UKIPO Hearing Officer, in which they rejected the registration of three trademarks (specifically applications 3019362, 3025822 and 3019361). [read post]
7 Dec 2018, 2:45 am
The registrar replied on 9 September 1997 suggesting instead that the description (I think 'representation' is the correct word, going by the statute, though I would also argue that what the words are is in fact a description not a representation, which should to my mind be enough to knock the whole thing on the head) of the mark be amended to read: 'The mark consists of the colour purple, as shown on the form of application, applied to the whole visible surface, or being the… [read post]
11 Dec 2017, 10:04 pm
It can be noted that the approach in the Turbek ruling was endorsed in Société des Produits Nestlé SA v International Foodstuffs [2014] ZASCA 187 (paragraph 66).It is interesting in view of the above to have brief regard to estoppel, which is still applicable in our law.ESTOPPELEstoppel is defined as follows by Sonnekus The Law of Estoppel in South Africa (2012) 2:“The doctrine of estoppel by representation as applied in the courts of South Africa… [read post]
6 May 2011, 12:46 pm
März 2011) in Sachen "Nestlé vs. [read post]
15 Jun 2015, 7:13 am
Wathelet gives Nestlé application a bit of stickCJEU’s Advocate General Wathelet delivered his Opinion in the keenly-awaited dispute in Case C‑215/14Société des Produits Nestlé SA v Cadbury UK Ltd, a reference from Mr Justice Arnold in the Chancery Division of the High Court, England and Wales [noted by the IPKat here and here]. [read post]
8 Mar 2017, 9:26 am
"Kit Kat" finger shape marks: this time in Singapore The Singapore Court of Appeal in Societe Des Produits Nestlé SA and anor v Petra Foods Limited and anor [2016] SGCA 64 recently affirmed a previous High Court decision that Nestlé’s two-finger and four-finger shape marks (the “Shape Marks”) are not registrable. [read post]
13 Mar 2017, 3:12 am
"Kit Kat" finger shape marks: this time in Singapore The Singapore Court of Appeal in Societe Des Produits Nestlé SA and anor v Petra Foods Limited and anor [2016] SGCA 64 recently affirmed a previous High Court decision that Nestlé’s two-finger and four-finger shape marks (the “Shape Marks”) are not registrable. [read post]
20 Jul 2009, 1:40 pm
Rosenfeld, CEO of Kraft Foods, the second largest food and beverage company in the world after Nestlé SA, as well as its board chairperson. [read post]
