No Requirement to Prove Likelihood of Confusion for Well-Known Trade Mark Infringement

Law on Trade Marks 17/2001, Arts. 8(1), 34(2) c) and 43 a) – MUNICH X 1. In the case of well-known trade marks, there is no requirement for a likelihood of confusion between the marks at issue. It is sufficient that there is a likelihood of association or a link leading the average consumer to believe that the products, although different, originate from the same undertaking, thereby enabling the later sign to benefit from the prestige and reputation acquired by the earlier trade mark. 2. The protection afforded to any prior trade mark, well-known trade marks [trade marks with a reputation], presupposes a genuine risk that the relevant public will make such an association. Procurador1 Ignacio Anzizu Pigem, in the name and on behalf of Munich S.L. and Berneda S.A., filed an ordinary claim against JJ. Ballvé Sports S.L.,2 in which he requested that judgment be handed down under which: