scopte of protection MRCar
 eiser |
 gedaagde |
|---|
In 2018, the plaintiff launches a new company under the name Mobility Next and myrefurbishedcar.nl. Both trade names are duly registered with the Chamber of Commerce (KvK). Additionally, on September 20, 2018, the domain name <mrcar.nl> is also secured. Located in Houten, the company offers used cars with the quality of new ones, primarily mid-range cars, manufactured between 2018 and 2022.
On March 5, 2021, the new website is launched, where the company also presents itself under the name MRCar. However, this name is not officially registered in the trade register of the Chamber of Commerce.
On May 10, 2021, the defendant registers the domain name <mrcars.nl> and registers the trade name with the Chamber of Commerce as well. This company, located in Berlicum, also deals in used cars, albeit with model years between 2005 and the late 90s, with prices ranging from 500 to 10,000 euros.
The plaintiff argues that the defendant’s use of the name MRCARS infringes upon its older trade name MRCar. The demand is: the defendant must cease all use of the name MRCARS within four weeks. Not only must the trade name be changed, but also the website, letterhead, advertising, business cards, etc. Additionally, the defendant must bear all legal costs.
The defendant disputes this and argues that the plaintiff has no trade name rights to the name MRCar since it is not registered with the Chamber of Commerce. The plaintiff presents itself on the website under the name My Refurbished Car. Moreover, the name MRCar is descriptive and lacks distinctive character, thus providing no protection. Given the significantly different product offerings (types of cars being sold) and the geographic distance (Houten and Berlicum are 50 km apart), there is no risk of confusion. Therefore, the claim should be rejected. Who is right and why?
Decision
Whether a name is registered with the Chamber of Commerce or not is not decisive. Trade name rights arise from the use of a name in economic traffic. The use on the website is sufficient evidence that the name MRCar is used as a trade name (“We are MRCar, a new company…”).
The names MRCar and Mrcars are strongly similar. However, the judge follows the view that the name is not very distinctive. MR stands for Mister and Car is descriptive for cars. As a result, protection is limited.
The nature of the businesses differs. Entrepreneur A sells almost new cars in a higher price segment, while entrepreneur B sells old and cheaper cars, targeting different audiences. Even if confusion were to arise, it would quickly be dispelled once the website is visited (due to the completely different offerings). Moreover, both companies are located 50 km apart and there has been no real confusion yet. As a consequence, the claim is rejected.
