Log in

CLASS 46


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
WEDNESDAY, 26 JULY 2023
Decision on whisky trade mark in Iran

Reza Badamchi summarises a recent dispute in Iran concerning a whisky trade mark.

According to Article 32, Clause B of the Iranian Law on Registration of Patents, Industrial Designs, and Trade Marks of 2007, a trade mark will not be eligible for registration if it contradicts legal standards, public order or moral values.

In line with this, Class 33 of Iran’s trade mark classification list has been removed. This is because the production, purchase, sale, and consumption of any kind of alcoholic beverages are prohibited in Iran according to Islamic regulations and are punishable offences. (This prohibition applies to Muslims only.)

Trade mark application filed

In 2018, an Iranian citizen applied to register a trade mark that was already registered and known in Western countries for the production and distribution of alcoholic beverages.

The request was made to the Trade Mark Registration Office and covered Classes 3, 8, 11, 21, 26, 35, and 39. As there was no record or previous application for the mentioned mark in the specified classes at the Iranian Trade mark Registration Office, the application was accepted, the necessary procedures for its registration were carried out and the applicant received a registration certificate (number 311243).

Cancellation action

The owner of the Scotch company holding the original whisky trade mark initiated a lawsuit to nullify and cancel the trade mark certificate issued in Iran on the grounds of non-compliance with the Shariah, public order and moral values.

The litigant claimed that the registered Iranian trade mark was exactly the same as the trade mark already registered for whisky abroad and would mislead Iranian consumers regarding the origin of the goods and remind them of a forbidden product.

Based on Article 32, Clause B of the Law on Registration of Patents, Industrial Designs, and Trade Marks of 2007, and the third part of Article 6 of the Paris Convention, the court of first instance accepted the argument and cancelled the Iranian trade mark certificate.

The court argued that the registration of a well-known whisky trade mark is contrary to Shariah, public order, and moral values even when it is used for other goods because the reminiscence is always there.

Appeal decision

Following an appeal by the Iranian party, the appellate court found flaws in the first instance court's ruling and overturned it.

The appellate court’s reasoning was that the registration of the Scotch company’s trade mark outside the territorial jurisdiction of Iran for alcoholic beverages does not come under the grounds for invalidating a trade mark in Iran and Article 41 does not apply because the trade mark is not used in Iran and is therefore not known to Iranian consumers.

Iran is also a signatory to Article 6 of the Paris Convention, and its regulations are incorporated into domestic law under Article 9 of the Civil Code of Iran. According to these regulations, a trade mark that contradicts moral values or public order and misleads the general public can be invalidated.

To determine whether a trade mark is eligible for protection, all relevant circumstances and facts related to the trade mark must be considered.

In this case, the requested trade mark has been registered for permissible goods and services, and it is only protected for those specific goods and services according to the regulations.

The whisky company allegedly uses this type of trade mark for alcoholic beverages outside of Iran but it is impossible for it to carry out activities in Iran. Therefore, the mark does not mislead or deceive ordinary Iranian consumers and does not lead to unfair competition in trade.

The decision was issued last year and is final.

Reza Badamchi is managing partner of Reza Badamchi & Associates in Tehran and is a member of MARQUES

Posted by: Blog Administrator @ 08.57
Tags: Iran, whisky, Paris Convention, ,
Sharing on Social Media? Use the link below...
Perm-A-Link: https://www.marques.org/blogs/class46?XID=BHA5203
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






 

 

 

 

 

 


CONTACT

info@marques.org
+44 (0)116 2747355
+44 (0)116 2747365
POST ADDRESS

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

EMAIL

Ingrid de Groot
Internal Relations Officer
ingrid.de.groot@marques.org
Alessandra Romeo
External Relations Officer
aromeo@marques.org
James Nurton
Newsletter Editor
editor@marques.org
Robert Harrison
Webmaster
robertharrison@marques.org
BLOGS

Signup for our blogs.
Headlines delivered to your inbox