Grünecker successfully represented RatPac Entertainment LLC in EU and German proceedings against Rat Pack Filmproduktion GmbH across all instances.
On January 8, 2025, the General Court of the European Union (T-163/24) ruled in favour of our client, finding no similarity between “film production” in class 41 and “financing services” in class 36, thereby dismissing the action brought by the other side. The Court held that the services in question are dissimilar due to differences in their nature, purpose and method of use. In particular, it held that while film production and film financing focus on entertainment and the financing of own projects, financing services are focused on financing of third parties. Also taking into consideration that the services require different knowledge and know how, the Court rightly concluded that the mere fact that a service involves financing does not suffice to establish similarity.
This decision upholds the findings of the Opposition Division and the Board of Appeal (R 877/2023-5), both of which previously rejected the opposition of Rat Pack Filmproduktion GmbH against our client’s EU designation of International Registration 1336518 “Ratpac” on the same grounds.
At the national level in Germany, Grünecker likewise secured a successful outcome for our client. The legal dispute between the same parties, which has been ongoing since 2015, was concluded by a decision of the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) dated April 4, 2024 (I ZR 115/23), which ruled in favour of our client, dismissing the complaint.
In the German proceedings, Rat Pack Filmproduktion GmbH brought claims against our client based on trademark and company sign rights regarding the use of the sign “Ratpac” in trailers, film credits, DVD covers, and movie posters. Besides, Rat Pack Filmproduktion GmbH alleged that use for “film financing” would be similar to “film production” for a German audience.
We won the case partly in the first instance with the District Court of Munich. In the second instance, the Appeal Court of Munich (OLG) had ruled in favour of our client on September 26, 2019 (6 U 2612/17). Rat Pack Filmproduktion GmbH had then filed an appeal against the non-admission of the case to the German Federal Supreme Court (BGH). After the case was referred back to the OLG Munich by the BGH (decision of 28.05.2020 – I ZR 190/19 – RatPac), we were again able to defend the action in its entirety (decision of the OLG Munich of 03.08.2023). This decision is now legally binding, as the other side´s renewed non-admission complaint was rejected by the BGH (I ZR 115/23).
Representatives of RatPac Entertainment LLC:
Grünecker: Dr. Holger Gauss, Dr. Elvira Bertram, LL.M. (EUI)
BGH: Dr. Matthias Koch
General Court: Dr. Holger Gauss, Dr. Elvira Bertram, LL.M. (EUI) and Natalie Vachova, LL.M. Eur.
Representatives of Rat Pack Filmproduktion GmbH:
Ampersand: Susanne Schmidt and Dr. Patrick Baronikians
BGH: Prof. Dr. Christian Rohnke
General Court: Susanne Schmidt and Dr. Patrick Baronikians