Cécile de Lagarde discusses Louboutin’s “red sole trade mark”

  • March 26, 2018
  • By Hunters Law

Louboutin’s “red sole trade mark” at risk of being invalid

French shoe maker Louboutin’s well-known red sole, which has been registered as an EU trade mark not without difficulty, is now at risk of being found invalid as the Advocate General at the European Court of Justice gave an additional opinion on 6th February 2018 in a case referred to the European Court of Justice by a Dutch court (Louboutin and another v Van Haren Schoenen BV (Case C-163/16)).

Louboutin started trade mark infringement proceedings against a Dutch company known as Van Haren, who launched a collection of high-heeled women’s shoes with red soles in 2012, which appeared very similar to Louboutin’s. As a defence, Van Haren claimed that the red sole trade mark was invalid. Article 3(1) of the 2008 Trade Marks Directive prevents registration as a trade mark of any sign that consists exclusively of a shape that gives substantial value to the goods. The question was whether the concept of “shape” covers not only the three-dimensional properties of goods (such as their contours, measurements and volume) but also colours.

According to the Advocate General, the prohibition set out in the trade mark directive is capable of applying to a sign combining colour and shape, such as Louboutin’s red soles. Moreover, he was doubtful as to whether the colour red can perform the essential function of a trade mark, namely that of identifying the origin of the goods when used separately from the shape of the shoe. The Advocate General was also of the view that the red colour of the sole gave substantial value. He pointed out that the concept of “substantial value” related exclusively to the intrinsic value of the shape; and must take no account of the reputation of the mark or its proprietor.

If this opinion is followed, this could mean that Louboutin will not be able to prevent its competitors, including haute couture houses, from commercialising red soled shoes.

At the opposite end of the market, the footwear brand Crocs has just lost its European design protection for its famous rubber sandals following a decision of the General Court of the European Union, which confirmed a decision of the European Union Intellectual Property Office invalidating the registered design for lack of novelty.

For queries in relation to commercial matters, please contact the partner at Hunters having responsibility for your legal matters, or for new enquiries please contact a member of our Business team.

Cécile de Lagarde is an Associate Solicitor specialising in intellectual property law. 

Related News

Feb 19, 2021
Stephen Morrall comments on Uber losing a landmark Supreme Court battle in the Evening Standard and the Financial Times
Feb 12, 2021
Richard Baxter and Hannah Solel examine data protection post-Brexit in Information Security Buzz
Feb 05, 2021
Budget 2021 – Still time to prepare for any changes to Business Asset Disposal Relief
Jan 13, 2021
Stephen Morrall and Hannah Solel discuss the gig economy in 2021 in Employee Benefits
Jan 11, 2021
Richard Baxter and Hannah Solel provide a legal update on data protection in 2021
Jan 06, 2021
Stephen Morrall comments on unfair dismissal in Real Business
Dec 14, 2020
Hunters strengthens its Business team with new arrival
Jun 25, 2020
Stephen Morrall and Philippa Kum discuss witnessing a deed remotely
Jun 01, 2020
Amanda Lathia examines the legal challenges of returning to work during the post-COVID-19 lockdown in WealthBriefing
May 15, 2020
Amanda Lathia comments on returning to work during the pandemic

© Hunters Law LLP 2021 | Privacy NoticeLegal & Regulatory | Cookies Policy | Complaints Procedure.

Hunters Law LLP is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (number 657218)

WARNING: Website falsely claiming to be Hunters Law

4 March 2021

The website '' is operating, falsely claiming to be Hunters Law. This website has been created to mirror the genuine site, although contact details including telephone number and email addresses have been changed, and the SRA verification badge does not work.

We have also been made aware of a series of faxes circulating, purporting to come from ‘barrister’ Dominik Opalinski, advising of an unclaimed inheritance of $16.95M, which feature the same website address. Dominik is a genuine partner of the firm, but is not a barrister.

We have reported this to the SRA, and contacted the website domain hosts to request its urgent removal. If you receive correspondence of a similar nature to that described, please contact us directly by reliable and established means.