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
Who has territorial jurisdiction over labour disputes where there is a foreign element?
and Kelly Sease, Candidate Attorney Technology has contributed to a significant increase in global mobility, which has enabled the ability [...]
Energy Performance Certificate for commercial buildings
On 13 January 2020, the Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy published a draft Regulation for the Mandatory Display [...]
The implication of the amendments to the Financial Intelligence Centre Act, 38 of 2001
With effect from 19 December 2022, the list of "accountable institutions", as contained in Schedule 1 to the Financial [...]
Trust transparency as a means to combat money laundering: what should trustees know
by Benedict Ngobeni, Candidate Attorney Concerns around money laundering and other illicit financial activities have been gaining traction over [...]
Play it again (and again): A new regime for complementary medicines
The Minister of Health has published certain amendments to the General Regulations ("the Regulations") made in terms of the [...]
Information Regulator bites! Enforcement Notice issued against the SAPS
It was with great shock that the South African society learned about the rape of several women near Krugersdorp [...]