Interflora Inc. v. Marks & Spencer Plc
European Union Court of Justice
[2012] E.T.M.R. 1, Case C-323/09 (2011)
- Written by Margot Parmenter, JD
Facts
Interflora Inc. (plaintiff) managed a worldwide flower-delivery service. Its business model centralized the flower-ordering process while distributing fulfillment: Interflora managed online, in-person, and telephone orders and sent each order to the florist located closest to the recipient for fulfillment. Interflora owned the trademark for the word “Interflora” in the UK and the corresponding community trademark in the European Union (EU). It possessed a considerable reputation in both the UK and the EU. Marks & Spencer Plc (M&S) (defendant), an all-purpose UK retailer, also provided a flower-delivery service via its website. To advertise, M&S used Google’s AdWords service, which allowed entities to select keywords that would trigger advertisements for their services on a user’s search-results page. M&S chose the keyword “Interflora,” identical to Interflora’s trademark. Interflora sued to prohibit M&S’s advertising efforts, and the case was eventually referred to the EU Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.