This is article two of three looking at the registrability of shape marks. We have already seen that shape marks are not registrable where the shape is of the goods themselves. We looked at the case of Philips Electronics NV v Remington Consumer Products Ltd (No 2) [1999] RPC 809, this case is also important when we consider the shape of goods which is necessary to achieve a technical result.

In Philips it was the three rotor configuration of the razor head that gave it a technical superiority. The ECJ made it clear that the restriction was not based soley on situations where the shape in question was the only way to achieve a particular technical outcome but also to situations where the shape is important to achieve a technical outcome.