Legal updates and opinions
News / News
CANCELLED OR PARTIALLY CANCELLED TRADE MARKS – SOME TAKE AWAYS
By Donvay Wegierski, Director
The European Union’s Trade Mark office (EUIPO) has this year cancelled McDonald’s European Union Trade Mark registrations for BIG MAC and partially cancelled the trade mark MC in the EU as a consequence of non-use applications filed by Irish fast food chain Supermac.
The general principle is that if a trade mark is not used for a certain period, a trade mark can be vulnerable to cancellation for non-use. It is necessary for an interested third party to formally file cancellation proceedings on the grounds of non-use and it is then left up to the trade mark owner to shift that onus by providing evidence that the mark has in fact been used.
Brand owners are reminded of some of the implications:
- Enforcement: A cancelled or partially cancelled mark can still be used but enforcing it against others for
unauthorised use is confined to those goods and services for which the registration remains valid in the EU; - Evidence of use: Both rulings adverse to McDonalds provide some guidance to brand holders as to the evidence of
use required if defending a non-use cancellation action. The standard of proof is not excessively high but the
evidence provided should be strong:- Evidence of online use also requires visitor statistics;
- Evidence of use must show that the mark is used within the normal course of trade and genuine, that is
the mark is used in relation to the goods and services for which the mark is registered in that
territory in exchange for payment; - Advertising material, affidavits and brochures also require proof of actual sales such as invoices; and
- Although considered, affidavits signed by employees are less persuasive than those from an unrelated
source are.
- Distinctiveness: It is common to use a mark in combination with a range of products, which together, comprise a
family of marks. Brand owners should ensure that this mark is also used alone to retain the distinctiveness of
the mark; and - Review and refile: Brand owners refile trade marks that are not in use, albeit defensively, protecting those
trade marks that are vulnerable to cancellation for non-use.
Latest News
Labour court provides much needed correction on no work no pay cases
By Bradley Workman- Davies, Director and Neo Sewela, Candidate Attorney The Johannesburg High Court recently found in the matter of [...]
The important role of regional courts in the African Continental Free Trade Area – The Mseto judgment by the East African Court of Justice
By Pieter Steyn, Director The African Continental Free Trade Area ("AfCTA") has raised the prospect of greater trade, investment and [...]
Discovery vs Liberty – When is use of a trade mark an infringement?
by Janine Hollesen, Director Various Discovery companies took Liberty Group Limited (“Liberty”) to court over Liberty’s use of Discovery’s VITALITY [...]
Solutions thick and fast but as of 1 July 2020, innovation must incorporate POPIA conditions
By Ahmore Burger-Smidt , Director, Head of the Data Privacy Practice Group "The recently reported cyber attack on a healthcare [...]
Urgent update: Amendments to lockdown level 3 regulations
by Jacques van Wyk, Director; Andre van Heerden, Senior Associate; and Thabisa Yantolo, Candidate Attorney On 25 June 2020 the [...]
POPIA, Employment Contracts and Policies and Procedures
by Ahmore Burger-Smidt, Director and Head of the Data Privacy Practice; Jacques van Wyk, Director, Labour & Employment Practice; and [...]

