Someone recently bought our

students are currently browsing our notes.


Harmonisation in the Internal Market v Wm Wrigley Jr Company ( DOUBLEMINT)

[2003] Case C-191/01 P

Case summary last updated at 31/01/2020 15:27 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team.

Judgement for the case Harmonisation in the Internal Market v Wm Wrigley Jr Company ( DOUBLEMINT)

Chewing gum company sought to register trademark “doublemint” in relation to a chewing gum. Held:
·       “Doublemint”simply indicated a doubling of mint flavour
Ø  The two individual words themselves were descriptive
Ø  And word as a whole was no different from sum of its parts
–       i.e. as only difference was that space between words had been subtracted
·       Thus was descriptive of goods characteristics
Multiple Meanings
·       Mark is excluded if at least one of its possible meanings is descriptive of goods
Ø  Even if some of its other possible meanings are not descriptive
·       Thus fact that there is ambiguity as to nature of mint involved (peppermint, spearmint) is irrelevant.
·       Trade mark may be refused even if mark is not actually descriptive of goods at time of application
Ø  provided that it could be used for descriptive purposes

Have you seen Oxbridge Notes' best Intellectual Property Law study materials?

Our law notes have been a popular underground sensation for 10 years:

  • Written by Oxford & Cambridge prize-winning graduates
  • Includes copious academic commentary in summary form
  • Concise structure relating cases and statutes into an easy-to-remember whole
  • Covers all major cases for LLB exams
  • Satisfaction guaranteed refund policy
  • Recently updated
Intellectual Property Law Notes

Intellectual Property Law Notes >>