Log in


Now in its twelfth 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.

Want to receive Class 46 by email?
Click here subscribe for free.

Who we all are...
Anthonia Ghalamkarizadeh
Birgit Clark
Blog Administrator
Christian Tenkhoff
Fidel Porcuna
Gino Van Roeyen
Markku Tuominen
Niamh Hall
Nikos Prentoulis
Stefan Schröter
Tomasz Rychlicki
Yvonne Onomor
Poland: confusion around ARENDA

R-178655The Polish company Arenda Biuro Obrotu Nieruchomosci from Warsaw filed before the Polish Patent Office a request for invalidation of the right of protection of  the ARENDA WOJCIECHOWSCY trade mark (R-178655), which was registered in classes 35, 36, 37 and 42. The company from Warsaw claimed that there was a risk of confusion between the ARENDA WOJCIECHOWSCY trade mark and the ARENDA trade mark (R-94766) which was applied for with an earlier priority on 3 November 1994 and registered on 27 March 1997 for services in class 36 for real estate agency and brokerage.

ARENDA S.C. from Czestochowa argued that claims based on article 132(2)(ii) of the Polish law,

2. A right of protection for a trade mark shall not be granted, if the trade mark:
(ii) is identical or similar to a trade mark for which a right of protection was granted or which has been applied for protection with an earlier priority date (provided that the latter is subsequently granted a right of protection) on behalf of another party for identical or similar goods, if a risk of misleading the public exists, in particular by evoking association with the earlier mark,
were unfounded because an assessment of the overall impression excludes the risk of confusion as regards the disputed trade marks. The company argued that both signs have different graphics, which clearly distinguishes them. Another argument was that the PPO had already registered six different trade marks with the ARENDA element. Despite the fact that, in the Polish language, "arenda" formely meant "lease" or "tenancy", the PPO had invalidated the right of protection for a trade mark in part - in class 36 in its decision of 27 October 2008 act signature Sp. 487/07.

Posted by: Tomasz Rychlicki @ 09.34
Tags: likelihood of confusion, Poland, Polish Patent Office, Polish trade marks,
Sharing on Social Media? Use the link below...
Perm-A-Link: https://www.marques.org/blogs/class46?XID=BHA925
Reader Comments: 0
Post a Comment

MARQUES does not guarantee the accuracy of the information in this blog. The views are those of the individual contributors and do not necessarily reflect those of MARQUES. Seek professional advice before action on any information included here.

The Class 46 Archive








+44 (0)116 2747355
+44 (0)116 2747365

9 Cartwright Court, Cartwright Way
Bardon, Leicestershire
LE67 1UE


Ingrid de Groot
Internal Relations Officer
Alessandra Romeo
External Relations Officer
James Nurton
Newsletter Editor
Robert Harrison

Signup for our blogs.
Headlines delivered to your inbox