Cabinet Chaillot

Cabinet Chaillot - Jurinea

Action for Civil liability

Jurinea Form 292

Parties to the case	OLYMPIQUE (Mark) JEUX OLYMPIQUES (Mark) COMITE NATIONAL OLYMPIQUE ET SPORTIF FRANCAIS (Denomination) Affiche JO d'Alberville : encadré bleu + soleil + montagnes + anneaux olympiques (Prior use)
versus	OLYMPRIX (Mark) Affiche "LES OLYMPRIX" : étendard bleu + lettres jaunes (Advertisement)

10-08-00, CA de Paris (Reference court)

Domain --- Issue of law	Result
Famous marks / well-known marks	Yes
--- Use of a similar sign forbidden	No
--- Depreciation of the notoriety of the mark	No
--- Unjustified exploitation of the famous mark	No
Speciality of goods and/or services
--- Identical or similar goods ------ Organization of events - and - Placard ------ Organization of sport meetings - and - Catalogue	No
Comparaison of the signs
--- Imitation of the essential term	Yes
--- Reproduction as such	No
Civil liability	No
--- Acts distinct from the infringement	No
--- Competition by interference	No
Comparaison of the signs
--- Similitude	No
Civil liability
--- Likelihood of confusion	No
--- Interference with the company name	No

Enacting terms:	Order on the ground of Art 700 NCPC	30,489 Euros
	Dismiss of the appeal	Non

Publication(s):

PIBD 2001, Ref.: 718, III, 207

06-29-99, Chambre commerciale (Appeal to the Supreme Court)

Domain --- Issue of law	Result
Proceedings
--- Right to sue of a national representative "on a third party's account"	Yes
--- Right to sue conferred by the statutes	Yes
Comparaison of the signs
--- Reproduction as such	No
Famous marks / well-known marks	Yes
--- Use of a similar sign forbidden	No

Enacting terms:

Order to pay costs to the defendant

Yes

Publication(s):

PIBD 1999, Ref.: 683, III, 387

01-15-97, CA de Versailles (Appeal)

Domain --- Issue of law	Result
Proceedings
--- Right to sue conferred by the statutes	Yes
Famous marks / well-known marks	Yes
--- Knowledge of the mark by a main part of the public in France	Yes
--- Attractive power extending over the designated products	Yes
--- Use of a similar sign forbidden	Yes
--- Use of the mark inflicting injury to the holder	Yes
Comparaison of the signs
--- Imitation of the essential term	Yes
--- Phonetic similitude	Yes
--- Likelihood of confusion	Yes
Civil liability	Yes
Proceedings
--- Prejudice indemnification is function of the lost profit	No
--- Correct evaluation of the dammage	Yes
Validity of an nullity action by a holder of a notorious mark	No
--- Ill-founded application	No
--- Prescription of the action in nullity	Yes
Civil liability
--- Acts distinct from the infringement	No
--- Competition by interference	No
--- Interference with the company name	No
Responsability of a third party
--- Responsability of the communication society	No

Enacting terms:	Damages	30,489 Euros
	Interdiction (by established infraction)
	Order on the ground of Art 700 NCPC	7,622 Euros
	Order to pay costs to the defendant	Yes
	Set aside of the decision	Yes

Publication(s):	Ann. 1997, Ref.: p.142
	PIBD 1997, Ref.: 644, III, 654