The Patent Office rejected an application to register a service mark consisting of the word EUROCONSULT combined with a device for financial and insurance services on the ground that the component "EURO" would be deceptive unless the applicant could show that its activities were part of a European enterprise or an independent entity with branches or affiliates in other European countries. On appeal, the Patent Court upheld the Patent Office's decision. Both the Patent Office and the Patent Court relied on several court decisions which had held, with respect to the registrability of company names, that the term "EURO" might suggest that the enterprise concerned was capable of offering its services throughout Europe. The Patent Office and Patent Court took the position that, since the petitioner was only in a position to offer its services in other European countries through independent and unrelated local firms, use of the element "EURO" in EUROCONSULT would be deceptive and misleading.

The Supreme Court, on the other hand, pointed out that the applicant had not intended to use the term "EURO" as a component of its company name, but rather as part of its service mark, and held that case law pertinent to company names did not apply to trademarks. In the opinion of the Court, the likelihood of deception with respect to company names did not exist in the case of the service mark EUROCONSULT, because consumers to whom the applicant intended to market its services would assume that it would be able to provide the services it marketed in at least the capacity of an agent or broker. The Court held that, since the applicant's company name did not contain the "EURO" element, consumers were not likely to be deceived.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court directed that the matter be referred back to the Patent Office to reconsider the issue of the inherent registrability of the service mark. In effect, the Supreme Court held that different criteria exist with respect to the examination of company names on the one hand and trademark and service marks on the other, because consumers are capable of distinguishing between them.