Case of the Jallas Prize: Coca-Cola awarded in Oslo District Court – Coca-Cola Co. – Law and justice



[ad_1]

O. Mathisen launched in February last year lemon soda, which was named Jallasprite.

He found reactions from The Coca-Cola Company, the global giant that owns the Sprite brand.

The Norwegian soda producer did not give up anyway, and in October of the same year, the name changes were announced for JallaXXXXXX, without falling into better soil at Coca-Cola.

In March, the Court of Appeal issued a temporary injunction against O. Mathisen. This meant that they were denied the sale, distribution and marketing of soft drink under the name JallaXXXXXX.

Last week, the Oslo District Court began to process the case. The US soft drink producer demanded, among other things, that O. Mathisen not use the name Jallasprite and JallaXXXXXX, recalling bottles and marketing materials with names and substitution.

E24 (+): Inside the shower company that makes Coca-Cola furious

The District Court prohibits the use of the name

Now the verdict is available in the Oslo District Court in civil proceedings. And on Tuesday's verdict, Coca-Cola won in most points.

According to the end, O. Mathisen forbids using only the name Jallasprite or as part of a feature. The local soft drink manufacturer is also required to note bottles of this name before they go on sale.

In addition, the use of the word JallaXXXXXX is prohibited by itself or as part of a characteristic of the refrigerant products.

The District Court instructs all bottles and marketing materials with both names to be withdrawn and removed from business within two weeks.

The same deadline applies to the destruction of labels and marketing materials with names.

Must pay compensation

In the question of damages, the judgment states that O. Mathisen AS must pay NOK 281,329 to Coca-Cola, in addition to the legal costs of NOK 200 000.

At the trial, the court finds, among other things, that consumers will associate Jallasprite with the Sprite brand.

The correct conclusion is also that the use of the name Jallasprite implies "an unreasonable exploitation" of the Sprite brand, and that its use "is capable of damaging" the distinctive character of the brand.

Furthermore, it is stated in the judgment that the District Court of Oslo agrees with the Court of Appeal that O. Mathisen's use of the name JallaXXXXXX "was contrary to good commercial practice".

However, Coca-Cola has not received the allegation that O. Mathisen should also be banned from using similar brand variants, where it appears that the word Sprite is censored.

The deadline for appeal is one month from the decision, according to the district court.

[ad_2]

Source link