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
How to compensate the victims of collusion
In the sphere of competition law, anti-competitive practices can have a detrimental effect on an economy and the performances of [...]
The potential for competition law enforcement to revive and promote faster economic growth in South Africa
On 2 February 2016, the World Bank released its annual economic update report, titled “South Africa Economic Update, Promoting Faster [...]
2016/2017 budget proposals – Tax overview
INTRODUCTION The trend that began three years ago of a reduced number of substantive amendments announced in the [...]
Inside information interpreted by the courts
Matters relating to insider trading do not often come before the South African courts as the Enforcement Committee of the [...]
The termination of service level agreements: the application of Section 197 of the LRA
Enviroserv Waste Management v Interwaste (Pty) t/a Interwaste Environmental Solutions and Others (P408/15) [2015] ZALCPE 66 Issue Whether the expiry [...]
Tax amendments – 2015
INTRODUCTION The Taxation Laws Amendment Act, 2015 and the Tax Administration Laws Amendment Act, 2015 have now both been passed by Parliament, [...]

