Login | Join Us | Contact Us | Search
 
 
 

 
 
  About Us   Press         Conferences   Members   Teams       Publications   Class 46     Position Papers   FAQs        Links     

Class 46 - for your European trade mark news
 

Now in its sixth year, Class 46  is dedicated to European trade mark law and practice.  This weblog is written by a team of enthusiasts who want to spread the word and share their thoughts with others.
 
  THURSDAY, 11 SEPTEMBER 2008
Some new rules of the Director-General of the Benelux Organisation for Intellectual Property

On 9 September 2008 the Director-General of the Benelux Organization for Intellectual Property (the Office) published some new rules with regard to the withdrawal of trade mark filings that the Office has refused to register on absolute grounds and with regard to the withdrawal of oppositions.

With regard to the withdrawal of trade mark filings refused on absolute grounds:

1. Filings refused on absolute grounds can be withdrawn before the decision of the Office becomes final, according to art. 2.11 par. 5 Benelux Convention on Intellectual Property (BCIP), which reads as follows: ‘Refusal shall only become final when the decision is no longer subject to appeal or, if appropriate, the decision of the appeal authority is no longer subject to referral to a high court of appeal.
2. A filing which has been refused on absolute grounds can also be partially withdrawn before the end of the period for objections against the intention of the Office to refuse the registration (in whole or in part). For filings done before January 1, 2009 this period is at least one month and at the most six months after the date of service of the first notice of the refusal intention to the applicant. Partial withdrawal is no longer possible after the period for objections has expired as has been decided by the Benelux Court in the decision ‘Langs Vlaamse Wegen’(case A 2002/2).
Please note: for filings done on or after January 1, 2009 the period for objections will be three months. After expiration of this period the Office shall extend the period for objections with one month ex officio. Furthermore during a pending period for objections an extension can be requested.
3. If the refusal on absolute grounds concerns (only) a part of the designated goods or services the filing can only be withdrawn for those goods or services until the refusal decision becomes final according to art. 2.11 par. 5 BCIP.
4. A registrant who withdraws a refused filing after the period for appeal against the decision of the Office has started to run (art. 2.11 par. 4 BCIP: ‘If the Office’s objections against registration have not been lifted within the period laid down, registration of the trademark shall be refused in whole or in part. The Office shall inform the applicant in writing without delay, indicating the grounds for refusal, and advising of the remedy against that decision, referred to in Article 2.12 BCIP’), waives the right to appeal against the decision on the basis of art. 2.12 par 1 BCIP (‘Within two months following the communication referred to in Article 2.11(4), the applicant may lodge a petition with the Court of Appeal in Brussels, the Gerechtshof in the Hague or the Court of Appeal of Luxembourg with a view to obtaining an order for registration of the trade mark’).

With regard to the withdrawal of oppositions:

1. Opposing parties can withdraw oppositions until the decision of the Office, according to art. 2.16 par. 4 BCIP, becomes final (‘The Office’s decision shall only become final when it is no longer subject to appeal or, where appropriate, the ruling of the appeal court is no longer open to referral to a high court of appeal’).
2. The only effect of a withdrawal of an opposition after the Office has reached a decision is that the Office shall not execute its decision. The cost order of the Office however remains enforceable (art. 2.16 par. 5 BCIP: ‘Costs shall be borne by the losing party. They shall be fixed in accordance with the provisions of the Implementing Regulations. Costs shall not be due if an objection is partly successful. The Office’s decision concerning costs shall constitute an order. Its forced implementation shall be governed by the rules in force in the State on the territory of which it takes place’).

3. If an opposition is withdrawn after the Office has reached a decision, the filing fee shall not be reimbursed.

Posted by: Gino Van Roeyen @ 10.59 
Tags: absolute grounds for refusal, Benelux trade marks, opposition, withdrawal,

 

   0 comments:    Post a comment

 
 

Search Class 46
Search:

Who we all are...

Birgit Clark
Edith Van den Eede
Fidel Porcuna
Frédéric Glaize
Gino Van Roeyen
Jeremy Phillips
Kathrin Vowinckel
Laetitia Lagarde
Mark Schweizer
Markku Tuominen
Niamh Hall
Nikos Prentoulis
Pedro Malaquias
Robert Börner
Tomasz Rychlicki

Receive Class 46 by email
3355 readers now receive the Class 46 weblog by email circular. Why don't you?

To subscribe, just type your email address in the box below, then click the 'Subscribe' button.
email:

Receive Class 46 by RSS Feed
523 readers now receive the Class 46 weblog via an RSS reader.

Subscribe in a reader


The Class 46 archive


+ 2013
+ 2012
+ 2011
+ 2010
+ 2009
- 2008
     + December (66)
     + November (60)
     + October (72)
     - September (86)
Mark-it: News from the UK IPO's Trade Marks Registry
MARQUES membership rates
Spain - Recent changes to the Spanish Trade Mark Act.
More non-minor GI amendments published
Competitiveness Council welcomes anti-counterfeiting plan
Poland: PANORAMA FIRM still distinctive
OHIM: fee reduction expected in mid-2009
UK IPO: Latest issue of IP Insight
FINLAND, the brand
A game of names, figures and letters
Non-minor amendments to PDOs announced
OHIM fee compromise: the MARQUES response
Apparently heavy litigation on Pink Ribbon trade marks in The Hague District Court
Russian Federation: Tanks against counterfeit merchandise
Poland: problems with SeX
Today in the Court of First Instance
Study on the effects of using Adwords
The Company Names Tribunal: adjudicating on opportunistic company name registrations
Eurobrand 2008
Latest ETMR
New rules on organic labelling and trade marks
"schlaemmerblog.tv" and "schlaemmerhatgolf.tv"
OHIM budget: proposals for reform
Latvia signs up for Singapore
Last week in the ECJ
"Best Global Brands 2008" ranking....
Dutch brewery Bavaria sells soft drinks division
MARQUES in Noordwijk 7
UKIPO: "Trade Marks Law Section" to be called "Trade Marks Tribunal Section"
OHIM: Latest Alicante News now published
MARQUES in Noordwijk 6
Netherlands: Not so fine for 'FINO'
MARQUES in Noordwijk 5
MARQUES in Noordwijk 4
MARQUES in Noordwijk 3
MARQUES in Noordwijk 2
Portakabin vs Primakabin: Dutch Supreme Court sends Adword case to ECJ
MARQUES in Noordwijk 1
OHIM: Delay in updating information on owners and representatives
Germany: "Green should not die"
Recent journals
Mixed fortunes for Ratiopharm appeals in BioGenerix cases
Poland: not only cool water
DPMA: Jena branch celebrates 10th anniversary with an exhibtion
UKIPO: Updated Exchange rate for Madrid Protocol Application fees paid via a UK deposit account
Wafer heads for PGI status
German Federal Patent Court: Spaghetti King - and latest issue of PMZ
Names of dead celebrities are registrable in Estonia
Book notice
Recent Community trade mark appeals
Davidoff heads back to the ECJ
Application to amend PDO specification
Some new rules of the Director-General of the Benelux Organisation for Intellectual Property
Federal Patent Court: Farbmarke Gelb-Rot (Colour trade mark Yellow-Red)
Where have all the Nordic post horns gone?
Spain - No summer vacations for the Police.
German Federal Supreme Court: POST
Raising arguments on appeal in Turkey
adidas strikes ten-year kit deal with Russian football teams
What happened in the Netherlands during my summer holidays (August 18 - September 5, 2008)?
Poland: jarzebiak is a generic term
German Federal Patent Court: Farbmarke Sonnengelb (colour trade mark sun yellow)
Local SEAT mark defeats CTM application for MAGIC SEAT
Eurolitas can't be compared with Eurodollars
MARQUES Council member moves
Poland: new rules for medicines advertising
Brand shrinkage in British home furnishings sector?
Poland: Tiffany fought with Tiffany
Poland: Merci not for coffee
Poland: trade mark owners say "cheese"
Black and Silver Rainbow
MARQUES international advertising portal goes live
UKIPO: A new form TM26(N) from 1 October 2008
Federal Patent Court: Colour trade mark Signal Yellow ("Farbmarke Signalgelb")
Spanish to be recognized as an official language of the Madrid system.
Poland: foreign and fanciful
New test developed for detecting faked vintage wines
Two more trade mark questions go for preliminary rulings
Italian government axes anti-counterfeiting watchdog
Jil Sander sold to Japanese fashion house
Artwork for Rolling Stones logo fetches $92,500
Germany: "Commerzbank, die Beraterbank" (?)
Consumer group demands removal of Green Dot symbol
Swiss Federal Insitute of Intellectual Property: Updated forms
DPMA: New form W7005 from 1 September 2008
Bosnia-Herzegovina prepares for closer ties with EU
     + August (48)
     + July (57)
     + June (64)
     + May (68)
     + April (72)
     + March (77)
     + February (100)
     + January (100)
+ 2007

 
 

Terms of Use: The material included on this site is provided for information purposes only, and we make no representations or warranties as to its accuracy. It does not represent legal advice. Before relying on this material, you should take care to verify its accuracy, taking professional advice as appropriate. [Please click here for the full Terms and Conditions of Use]

Copyright ©2008-2013 MARQUES Ltd and Individual Contributors