Search results

Selected filters:

Trademark law
Philippines

Article type

Topic

Sector

46 results found for your search

Sort options
20 February 2007

Dominancy test approved by Supreme Court

In McDonald's Corporation v Macjoy FastFood Corporation, the Supreme Court has upheld McDonald's Corporation's opposition against the mark MACJOY (and device). In so doing, the court reiterated that the correct test for determining a likelihood of confusion is the test of dominancy and not the holistic test.

26 January 2007

Wind knocked from sails of NS NORTH SAILS application

In North Sails Group LLC v Tuy, the Intellectual Property Office's Bureau of Legal Affairs has rejected an application to register the mark NS NORTH SAILS (and design) for goods in Class 9 of the Nice Classification. The bureau held that consumers are likely to confuse it with the internationally well-known marks NS NORTH SAILS (and design) and NORTH SAILS registered in the name of North Sails Group LLC for goods in Classes 9 and 25.

06 September 2006

Local owner loses SHANGRI-LA mark

In Shangri-La International Hotel Management Ltd v Developers Group of Companies Inc, the Supreme Court of the Philippines has overturned an earlier decision and has ruled that Developers Group of Companies Inc's registrations for the service mark SHANGRI-LA and an 'S' logo are void. The court ruled that the company had failed to adhere to the use requirements.

15 May 2006

VALMOX is confusingly similar to VOLMAX

In Glaxo Group Limited v IAE Pharmaceutical, the director of the Bureau of Legal Affairs has declared that the trademark VALMOX used on the antibiotic amoxicillin trihydrate is confusingly similar to Glaxo Group Limited's registered trademark VOLMAX used for an asthma treatment.

05 April 2006

USTR credits Philippines for effective enforcement of IP rights

The United States Trade Representative's Office has removed the Philippines from the priority watch list of countries that do not properly enforce IP rights and placed it instead on the ordinary watch list under the Special 301 Review. The move recognizes the Philippines government's attempts to enforce IP rights properly.

13 February 2006

IP reform driven forward by Supreme Court

Responding to an increasingly urgent need for the Philippine judiciary to adapt to the unique legal issues presented by IP rights, the Supreme Court of the Philippines has approved two proposals issued by the country's Intellectual Property Office: (i) the provision of specialized training on intellectual property to court personnel, and (ii) the establishment of courts that will focus solely on cases involving intellectual property.

17 October 2005

Nationwide inventory of IP cases ordered

The Department of Justice in the Philippines has ordered all its prosecutors nationwide to provide an inventory of all pending IP cases to facilitate the coordination of government agencies in the country's campaign against counterfeiting and piracy. The data gathered will allow the Intellectual Property Office to obtain an overall picture of the state of progress of this campaign.

02 September 2005

Levi's infringement and cancellation actions kept alive

The Philippine Supreme Court has ruled that an action for trademark infringement or unfair competition (including an application for an injunction and/or damages) in the ordinary courts can proceed independently or simultaneously with an action for the administrative cancellation of the registered trademark that is the subject of the infringement action.

30 March 2005

Rolex clocks up win despite non-competing business use

In Montres Rolex SA v Rolex Plastic Manufacturing Corporation, a court in Quezon City has ordered a local company to drop the internationally well-known trademark and trade name ROLEX from its corporate name. The court stated that although the local company was using ROLEX for a non-competing business, consumers were likely to associate it with Montres Rolex SA.

29 September 2004

McDonald's swallows up BIG MAK infringer - at last

In McDonald's Corporation v LC Big Mak Burger Inc, the Philippine Supreme Court has ruled that (i) the mark BIG MAK for hamburgers infringes McDonald's BIG MAC mark for the same goods, and (ii) the use of packaging similar to that of McDonald's constitutes unfair competition.

17 September 2004

GALLO marks for wine and cigarettes to coexist, rules court

In Mighty Corporation v E & J Gallo Winery, the Supreme Court of the Philippines has struck a blow against the owners of internationally well-known marks by holding that the use of the mark GALLO for tobacco products does not infringe the GALLO mark for wine.

16 June 2004

Philippine company ordered to drop Rolex name

The Securities and Exchange Commission has ordered a Philippine company engaged in the manufacture and sale of various types of scientific equipment to remove the term 'Rolex' from its registered corporate name. It held that Montres Rolex SA's rights in the ROLEX mark and trade name should be protected not only against unauthorized use on products but also against appropriation by unrelated companies.

25 March 2004

PLDT denied preliminary injunction for 'pldt.com'

In what appears to be the first domain name dispute to have reached a Philippine court, the Quezon City Regional Trial Court has denied Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company Inc's request for a preliminary injunction enjoining Philippine League for Democratic Telecommunications Inc from using the domain name 'pldt.com'.

15 October 2003

SHANGRI-LA is paradise lost for hotel chain

In Developers Group of Companies v Shangri-La International Hotel Management Ltd, the Court of Appeals for the Philippines has ruled that the plaintiff has superior rights to the service mark SHANGRI-LA and an 'S' logo. The court came to this conclusion in spite of evidence that the defendant is part of the Kuok Group, which has used a SHANGRI-LA service mark and 'S' logo since 1962.

10 July 2003

Tiffany wraps up opposition to handkerchief mark

In Tiffany & Co v Winston Hankies & Needlecraft Company, the director of the Bureau of Legal Affairs - a division of the Intellectual Property Office - has upheld the plaintiff's opposition to the registration of a sign featuring the name 'Tiffany' and some Chinese characters as a trademark for use in relation to handkerchiefs.