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
Large fines show FSCA is focused on enforcement to leave the grey list – a red flag for non-compliant financial services providers as more fines likely
Gone are the days of box-ticking. The FSCA has imposed penalties on financial services providers for non-compliance with FICA The [...]
Considerations of a surety relying on the remedies provided in the Insolvency Act
CASE NOTE Introduction On 9 February 2024, the Supreme Court of Appeal in the case of Cohen v Absa Bank [...]
New Earnings Threshold
and Danelle Plaatjies - Candidate Attorney On 5 March 2024 the Minister of Employment and Labour, Thembelani Waltermade Nxesi, published [...]
Regulator or Legislature?
The Information Regulator ("Regulator") issued its first Enforcement Notice regarding non-compliance with the direct marketing provisions of the Protection of [...]
Is your business struggling? Liquidation or Business Rescue are not the only options: The Section 155 Compromise
and researched by Thabani Dlamini - Candidate Attorney Introduction When your business is struggling and creditors are knocking down the [...]
Be careful what you wish for: Lessons from the LAC
On 13 October 2021 the Labour Court ("LC") found the dismissal of the employee to be automatically unfair. This was [...]