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
South Africa’s Greylisting: Regulatory authorities make progress on the Financial Action Task Force recommendations
Introduction It has been over a year since the Financial Action Task Force ("FATF") announced that South Africa had [...]
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 [...]
An extension of the Parate Executie principle in the liquidation context
Emontic Investments (Pty) Ltd v Bothomley and Others[1] Introduction A Parate Executie clause is generally regarded as an impermissible contractual [...]
Pro Bono Matters
In the past year, our pro bono team and other lawyers from Werksmans worked on a variety of matters across [...]
Business Rescue Trends in 2024 and Beyond
Brandon Starr - Candidate Attorney and Caitlin Steytler - Candidate Attorney With looming elections now scheduled for 29 May 2024, [...]