Search for: "Van Haren v. Van Haren"
Results 1 - 11
of 11
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Jun 2018, 9:57 am
With that in mind, the decision has finally been released by the CJEU earlier this week.Even though the facts of Christian Louboutin v Van Haren Schoenen BV have been discussed extensively on this blog, they are worth revisiting. [read post]
12 Jun 2018, 9:57 am
With that in mind, the decision has finally been released by the CJEU earlier this week.Even though the facts of Christian Louboutin v Van Haren Schoenen BV have been discussed extensively on this blog, they are worth revisiting. [read post]
24 Aug 2017, 3:00 pm
. 📷✍️📚Putting a Face to the Game: The Intellectual Property Implications of Using Celebrity Likenesses in Videogamesby Yin Harn LeeLecturer in Law, University of SheffieldLouboutin v Van Haren - AG Szpunar’s position on Louboutin’s red sole mark: a shoo-in for a shape markby Luxmi (“Lux”) RajanayagamQueen Mary, University of LondonStella McCartney v IMAX Srl - The protection of the ‘eco-friendly’… [read post]
20 Feb 2018, 1:13 am
Van Haren had been selling a similar shoe since 2012, and was sued for trademark infringement by Louboutin. [read post]
25 Jul 2017, 1:12 am
Van Haren challenged the infringement opposing the mark's registration, claiming invalidity. [read post]
15 Apr 2019, 11:44 pm
The Court of The Hague applied this decision and upheld the registration meaning that Van Haren infringed it (this conclusion followed from its earlier findings in 2015).Van Haren sought to resist this conclusion by raising, amongst other points, the issue in Textilis, which we cover [read post]
23 Jun 2017, 12:20 am
The case reference is Christian Louboutin and Christian Louboutin SAS v Van Haren Schoenen BV, C-163/16.More specifically, the Dutch court is asking the CJEU to answer this question:“Is the notion of ‘shape’ within the meaning of Article 3(1)(e)(iii) of Directive C (‘Form’, ‘vorm’ and ‘forme’ in the German, Dutch and French language versions of the Trade Marks Directive respectively) limited to the… [read post]
16 Jun 2010, 10:51 am
For example, in Van Haren v. [read post]
27 Aug 2018, 3:11 pm
A happy outcome in the United States was the decision here in Christian Louboutin S.A. v Yves Saint Laurent America Inc., No. 11-3303 (2d Cir. 2012) 1 ‘…the Red Sole Mark has acquired limited secondary meaning as a distinctive symbol that identifies the Louboutin brand, and…it is therefore a valid and protectable mark…’ (page 25) here.A second problem featured in the recent decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Christian… [read post]
17 Oct 2018, 3:59 am
It is now up to the Dutch court to decide whether Louboutin should come out on top, keep its Benelux registration and win its infringement action against Dutch shoe shop Van Haren. [read post]
8 May 2018, 6:37 am
The Red Sole 2: Szpunar’s backChristian Louboutin v Van Haren Case C‑163/16 (February 2018)I debated whether or not to include this – Advocate General opinions aren’t the final word, and the CJEU does not always follow them. [read post]
