Skip to content .

FFW acts for Remington in second landmark trade mark case

28 October 2004

City law firm Field Fisher Waterhouse acted for Remington, in its latest victory against Philips concerning Philips attempt to monopolise the market for three headed rotary shavers. The judgment clarifies the “technical result” exclusion for the purpose of the registrability of shapes as trade marks.  This is the first time in the UK the European Courts of Justice (ECJ) ruling in a previous action between the parties (made on 18 June 2002) has been applied.

The First Action
Trade mark litigation between Philips and Remington, which was purchased by the Rayovac Corporation in September 2003, began when Remington introduced a three-headed rotary shaver (the DT55) onto the UK market after many years of Philips enjoying a patent monopoly in this segment of the market.

Philips’ patent had expired but it was also the proprietor of a number of trade marks depicting the head of a shaver  (see notes for editors).

Philips sued Remington for trade mark infringement. However, Section 3(2)(b) of the Trade Marks Act states that:
“a sign shall not be registered as a trade mark if it consists exclusively of the shape of goods necessary to obtain a technical result.”

Remington successfully argued that Philips trade mark was exclusively functional and should be revoked. Following an unsuccessful appeal by Philips to the Court of Appeal and a referral of several questions on the interpretation of trade mark law to the ECJ, the trade mark was revoked.

The Second Action
In 2000, Remington introduced the FastTrack RS2623 and FastTrack RS2843 shavers onto the UK market.  Following their launch Philips issued proceedings against Remington for infringement of the trade mark. 

The Second Action differs from the First in that Philips’ Second Action Trade Mark is a different representation of the head of a three-headed rotary shaver, the main difference being the addition of a black line broadly in the shape of a clover leaf around the three heads.  The Remington FastTrack RS2623 and FastTrack RS2843 shavers, unlike the DT55 which was a wet/dry shaver, incorporate a clover leaf shape raised rim on the head of the shaver.

Remington argued that the clover leaf is exclusively functional and operates as a skin tightening rim assisting in producing a closer shave and that it also supports and prevents grazing of the skin.
Remington denied infringement of the trade mark and asserted that the heads of the Remington FastTrack RS2623 and FastTrack RS2843 shavers are not confusingly similar to Philips Second Action Trade Mark.  Remington also asserted that its use of the clover leaf feature on the FastTrack RS2623 and FastTrack RS2843 shavers is in accordance with honest practices in industrial or commercial matters.

Remington therefore argued that, like the First Action , Philips’ Second Action Trade Mark should also be revoked. 

Mr Justice Rimer found in favour of Remington. The decision was handed down on Thursday 21st October.

Simon Chapman, partner in FFW’s IP litigation group, acted for Remington. He says:
“This is the first time the ECJ ruling has been applied in the UK, and should be reviewed by any business concerned with the protection of the shape of products.  Philips were seeking to argue that features which had a technical function had also been chosen because of their aesthetic appeal and as such they were entitled to a continuing monopoly.  The Court did not agree.  Technical features are protected by a patent monopoly of limited duration and this judgment reaffirms that Philips cannot keep competitors out of the market by extending its monopoly via trade mark protection.”

For further press information, please contact:

Ben Girdlestone, Communications Manager, on  +44 (0)20 7861 4968

Louise Eckersley, PR Executive, on +44 (0)20 7861 4120

Press contacts

Louise Eckersley
  • Louise Eckersley
  • PR Manager
  • work t. +44 (0)20 7861 4120

Search news