UK: The Shape of Things to Come

Last Updated: 2 August 2002
Article by Stephen James

The Dutch electronics company Philips began developing electric razors in 1937. Two years later they introduced their first model to the market, a single headed rotary shaver. This was followed by a two headed rotary shaver and, in 1966, by a three headed product in which the heads were arranged in a triangular pattern which projected slightly above a triangular base plate. The three headed model was sold under the trade mark Philishave and soon became highly successful accounting for about 30% of the world’s electric shaver market. In the UK, Philips’ annual sales of Philishave razors had reached about 2 million by 1989 and, although this had fallen significantly (to about 400,000) by 1996, there is no doubt that the Philishave three headed razor was well known as a product made by Philips both prior to and during the 1990s in the UK. The clear association between this form of electric razor and Philips was assisted, in no small measure, by the lack of competing three headed shavers on the UK market during the period 1966 to 1995.

In 1985, in order to reinforce their monopoly, Philips registered a trade mark consisting of a picture of a three headed razor in the UK (registration no. 1254208). In spite of this, Philips’ monopoly was finally challenged in 1995 when Remington introduced their own three headed electric shaver, the DT55, to the UK market. Not surprisingly, Philips sued Remington for trade mark infringement and, in response, Remington sought to invalidate UK1254208 on various absolute grounds.

In 1999, the English Court of Appeal found in favour of Remington and cancelled UK1254208 on the basis of Sections 3(1)(a), 3(1)(b), 3(1)(c) and 3(2)(b) of the 1994 Trade Marks Act, which are derived from Articles 3(1)(a), 3(1)(b), 3(1)(c) and 3(1)(e) of the European Union’s Trade Marks Harmonisation Directive (89/104) (Philips Electronics NV v Remington Consumer Products Ltd). The Court ruled as follows:

  • The fact that a trade mark has by use become such as to denote goods of a particular trader did not necessarily mean that it was capable of distinguishing the goods of that trader from those of others.
  • A person who had had a monopoly use of a trade mark for many years might be able to establish that it did in fact denote his goods exclusively, but that did not mean that it had a feature which distinguished his goods from those of a rival who subsequently came into the market.
  • The shape of an article could not be registered in respect of goods of that shape unless it contained some addition to the shape of the article which had trade mark significance. It was that addition which made the mark capable of distinguishing or which could attain a distinctive character.
  • The restriction upon registration imposed by the words "which is necessary to obtain a technical result" was not overcome by establishing that there were other shapes which could obtain the same technical result.
  • Having made its ruling, the Court of Appeal recognised the importance of the issues raised by this case and therefore put a number of questions to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) concerning the proper interpretation of the Harmonisation Directive, especially Article 3(1), relevant sections of which are set out at the end of this article. The ECJ has now pronounced on four of the questions put to it by the Court of Appeal. We set out these four questions below, together with the relevant findings of the ECJ in each case.

Question 1

Is there a category of marks which is not excluded from registration by Article 3(1)(b), (c) and (d) and Article 3(3) of Council Directive 89/104/EEC which is none the less excluded from registration by Article 3(1)(a) of the Directive (as being incapable of distinguishing the goods of the proprietor from those of other undertakings)?

In response to this, the ECJ decided that there was no class of marks having a distinctive character (inherent or acquired by use) which was not capable of distinguishing goods or services within the meaning of the Directive (Article 2). In other words, if a trade mark was distinctive in fact and could therefore be registered in accordance with Articles 3(1)(b), (c) or (d) of the Directive, it could not be refused registration on the basis that it was incapable of distinguishing as a matter of law (Article 3(1)(a)).

Question 2

Is the shape (or part of the shape) of an article (being the article in respect of which the sign is registered) only capable of distinguishing for the purposes of Article 2 if it contains some capricious addition (being an embellishment which has no functional purpose) to the shape of the article?

Here the Court found that the criteria for assessing the distinctive character of 3-D trade marks were no different from those to be applied to other marks. In order to qualify for registration as a trade mark under the Directive, the shape of an article did not have to include a capricious addition with no functional purpose. The shape simply had to be capable of distinguishing a product having that shape and fulfilling the essential purpose of a trade mark, namely guaranteeing the origin of the product.

Question 3

Where a trader has been the only supplier of particular goods to the market, is extensive use of a sign, which consists of the shape (or part of the shape) of those goods and which does not include any capricious addition, sufficient to give the sign a distinctive character for the purposes of Article 3(3) in circumstances where as a result of that use a substantial proportion of the relevant trade and public

  1. associate the shape with that trader and no other undertaking;
  2. believe that goods of that shape come from that trader absent a statement to the contrary?

In answer to this question, the ECJ found that where a trader has been the only supplier of particular goods to the market, extensive use of a sign which consists of the shape of those goods may be sufficient to give the sign a distinctive character for the purposes of Article 3(3) of the Directive in circumstances where, as a result of that use, a substantial proportion of the relevant class of persons associates that shape with that trader and no other undertaking or believes that goods of that shape come from that trader.

It was, however, for the national court to decide whether or not the identification of the shape with the supplier was as a result of use of the shape as a trade mark. (emphasis added).

Question 4

  1. Can the restriction imposed by the words if it consists exclusively of the shape of goods which is necessary to achieve a technical result appearing in Article 3(1)(e)(ii) be overcome by establishing that there are other shapes which can obtain the same technical result, or
  2. is the shape unregistrable by virtue thereof if it is shown that the essential features of the shape are attributable only to the technical result, or
  3. is some other and, if so, what test appropriate for determining whether the restriction applies?

On this important question, the ECJ ruled as follows:

  • The aim of Article 3(1)(e)(ii) was to prevent the registration of shapes whose essential characteristics perform a technical function, with the result that the exclusivity in the trade mark right would limit the possibility of competitors supplying a product incorporating such a function or at least limit their freedom of choice in regard to the technical solution they wish to adopt in order to incorporate such a function in their product.
  • Even if other shapes could achieve the same technical result as the shape sought to be protected as a trade mark, this did not overcome an objection raised under Article 3(1)(e)(ii).


This case contains a number of sensible rulings. In relation to the Court’s findings on Article 3(1)(e)(ii), it must be correct that a (trade mark) monopoly should not be granted, potentially in perpetuity, for a trade mark, the essential characteristic of which has a functional purpose. Useful, functional advances should be protected by patent, with its limited term of exclusivity.

The dismissal of Philips’ argument that, since the same technical result could be achieved by razors with different shaped heads, their trade mark registration (for a three headed razor) would not lead to a monopoly in a particular technical result, also makes sense. If Philips’ argument were taken to its logical conclusion, there would be nothing to stop the leading manufacturers of a vast array of products identifying the optimum shape of product to achieve a desired function, protecting that shape by patent and, once the patent is nearing expiry, maintaining their monopoly forever by trade mark registration. Such a situation would be contrary to the public interest.

Further, in the writer’s view, a clear distinction should be made between the grant of trade mark protection for the shape of a product’s packaging and the shape of the product itself. Whilst it is clear that the same criteria for registrability should be applied to both, it is also suggested that the authorities should exercise particular care when considering the registration of product shapes. Whilst it is usually straightforward for a competitor to design around a leading manufacturer’s choice of packaging, it may be much more difficult, if not impossible, to design around the shape of the product itself, particularly if that shape incorporates functional features. It follows that potentially perpetual monopolies in product shapes should not be granted lightly.

The ECJ’s finding on Question 1 should ensure that we do not return to the old, unlamented days of York trailers (York Trailer Holdings v Registrar of Trade Marks, 1984 RPC 231). It will be recalled that, in that York case, the English Court contrived to refuse a trade mark application for York in relation to motor vehicle trailers, even though evidence of acquired distinctiveness had been provided to the Court’s satisfaction. In the Court’s view, a geographical indication such as York could never be distinctive in law even though it was distinctive in fact. Much has changed in trade mark law since that York decision (thank goodness) and it is to be hoped that the ECJ’s ruling that, if a mark is acceptable under Articles 3(1)(b), (c) or (d), it must also be acceptable under Article 3(1)(a), will be followed, without contradiction, by the various UK authorities.

The Court’s answers to Questions 2 and 3 offer at least some hope to the exclusive suppliers of shaped products that, provided the distinctive feature of their 3-D marks does not fall foul of Section 3(2) of the UK Trade Marks Act 1994 (Article 3(1)(e) of the Directive), their marks could be accepted for registration even if they do not contain a capricious addition to the shape and even if they have been sold in a monopoly situation for many years. These rulings ought to benefit designers whose principal concern is the visual impression made by a product. Those whose brief is to optimise the functional benefit offered by the design to the consumer should, quite rightly, still struggle to obtain trade mark protection for their (overwhelmingly functional) 3-D shapes.

The content of this article does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied on in that way. Specific advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.