Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) T-640/11, [2013] All ER (D) 72 (May)
It was settled case‑law that for a trade mark to possess distinctive character within the meaning of that provision, it should serve to identify the goods in respect of which registration was applied for as originating from a particular undertaking, and therefore to distinguish those goods from those of other undertakings, in order to enable the consumer who had acquired the goods designated by the mark to choose to acquire them again if it had been a positive experience, or to avoid doing so, if it had been negative. That distinctive character should be assessed, on the one hand, by reference to the goods or services for which registration has been sought and, on the other, by reference to the perception of the relevant public. For a finding that there was no distinctive character, it was sufficient that the semantic content of the word mark in question indicated to the consumer a characteristic of the goods or service which, whilst not specific, represented promotional
