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.
 
  TUESDAY, 13 OCTOBER 2009
Poland: personal circumstances in trade mark registration

On 9 October 1996, the Polish Patent Office registered the trade mark XAVIER LAURENT R-92393 for goods in class 3 such as personal deodorants. The trade mark is currenty owned by the Polish company HOUSE Spółka z o.o. from Zielona Góra. The International Trade Corporation Limited, the owne of XL XAVIER LAURENT IR-763083 trade mark filed a request for invalidation of the right of protection for XAVIER LAURENT R-92393 trade mark.

The ITC claimed it has been active in the cosmetics industry fo the long time and the most popular goods are these marked with the Xavier Laurent brand. The company had a national distributor of its products in Poland which on March 1994 applied to the Polish Patent Office for the trade mark registration of XAVIER LAURENT sign and later on it has assigned the right of protection for XAVIER LAURENT R-92393 to HOUSE.

The ICT based its request on article 8(1) and (2) of the old Polish Trade Mark Act - TMA - (in Polish: ustawa o znakach towarowych) of 1985, published in Dziennik Ustaw (Journal of Laws) of 1985 No 5, pos. 15, with later amendments:

A trade mark shall not be registrable if:
1) it is contrary to law or to the principles of social coexistence.
2) it infringes the personal or economic rights of third parties;
and article 6septies of the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property. The Polish Patent Office dismissed ICT's request and the company filed a complaint to the Voivodeship Administrative Court in Warsaw. On 5 May 2009, the DAC in a judgment case act signature VI SA/Wa 121/09 ruled that

1. Article 8(i) of the TMA must be interpreted broadly and concerns not only the form of trade mark, but also other subjective elements. The basis for invalidation may be, therefore, not only the characteristics of a trade mark itself, but also the reprehensible conduct of the applicant/owner. For the correctness of such interpretation of provisions of article 8(i) speaks the provisions of article 31 of the TMA that expressly provides for the invalidation of the registration rights acquired as a result of bad faith behaviour.
2. Article 161 of the IPL specifies the entity protected by this provision as "a person entitled to the exclusive use of the mark in a foreign country." The protection provided for in article 161 may be used by any entity (entrepreneur) from abroad, which will demonstrate that at least in one Member state a specific trade mark is its "property", especially it has the right of exclusive use that came from the relevant decision of public authorities (patent organ) in that country.

The VAC anulled the Polish Patent Office's decision from 2008 and decided that the decision was not subject to execution. The Judgment is not final yet.

Posted by: Tomasz Rychlicki @ 14.13 
Tags: Article 6septies, Bad faith, Poland, Polish courts, Polish law, Polish Patent Office, Polish trade marks,

 

   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
3256 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
519 readers now receive the Class 46 weblog via an RSS reader.

Subscribe in a reader


The Class 46 archive


+ 2013
+ 2012
+ 2011
+ 2010
- 2009
     + December (44)
     + November (55)
     - October (49)
Poland: what are serious reasons for non use of a trade mark?
Board of Appeal wrong again: Aygill's and Agile ARE sufficiently similar
Spain - Gathering of specialized IP Judges in Barcelona.
Latest ETMR now published
RNAiFect and RNActive: who would get confused?
John Deere prevails before CFI with colour combination mark
Jack Wolfskin relents
Poland: sometimes it's better not to refrain from trade mark use
"Living" with the CFI
Greek Supreme Court affirms toothpaste design is not distinctive
Gallecs and Gallo: is a single initial letter enough to support an opposition?
Spain – FORD scores at the Spanish CTM Court.
OHIM now using Twitter and YouTube
L'Oréal SA v eBay: so many questions to answer
Switzerland: no sweet success for Wander against Dr. Oetker
Calling all readers: do you know of a case ...?
Denmark: The Orient Express
Latest Alicante News focuses on Italy
Questions on acquiescence for ECJ
Ravioli and beans get GI status
Finland: Lappish Beer Migrating South
Spain – “I’m original. I do not buy fakes”.
Jack Wolfskin gets some heat in Germany
Cologne Court upholds preliminary action lodged by the Consorzio del Formaggio Parmigiano Reggiano and grants seizure of Argentinian ‘ parmesano’ and ‘reggianito’ cheese at the international Anuga food and beverage trade fair.
SFR loses right to French trade mark TEXTO
Spain - The Goverment is giving some thoughts on on-line IP infringement.
new gTLDS: trade mark owners: make noise before 22 November 2009
COLOR EDITION- the A-G delivers his opinion on the application by Lâncome
OHIM and WIPO meet in Spain to discuss cooperation on classification issues
Enforcement of rights on the internet in Belarus and Ukraine
Diesel ruling affirms that exhaustion still trumps TMs, but consent must be unequivocal
Metro Group obtains metrobar.ch, but not metro-express.ch
Are Kinder of Ferrero and TiMi similar?
Switzerland: PARK AVENUE not descriptive for publications
Burning brands in brain
Poland: personal circumstances in trade mark registration
Is ANDROID descriptive of computers and mobile devices?
UKIPO to adopt OHIM’s “case handling” software
Community Trade Marks & Designs Ltd condemned for misleading the public
FLUGBÖRSE appeal flies off to the ECJ
Somerset Cider Brandy GI spec now verified
UK: The latest registration initiatives by the IPO
Poland: metatags in Polish case-law
Company names and trade marks in the Russian Federation
Latest ETMR, Trademark World
CIPA conference presentation: German courts' position on AdWords
Greece: amendment of the rules regarding time-bar for unfair competition claims
     + September (48)
     + August (39)
     + July (54)
     + June (54)
     + May (55)
     + April (54)
     + March (57)
     + February (48)
     + January (61)
+ 2008
+ 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