Morgan & Morgan

Morgan & Morgan

507.265.7777
Email: [email protected]

Morgan & Morgan
MMG Tower, 23rd Floor Ave. Paseo del Mar, Costa del Este Panama City Rep. of Panama

Open in Google Maps
507.265.7777 | [email protected]
  • LANGUAGES
    • English English
    • Español Español
  • Home
  • About Us
    • History
    • Global Reach
    • Gender Equity
    • Code of EthicsDownload
    • Prevention and Management of Professional Risk Policy
  • Attorneys
    • Associates
    • Partners
    • Founders
  • Practice Areas
    • COLUM1
      • Antitrust and Consumer Protection
      • Banking and Finance
      • Criminal Law
      • Energy and Natural Resources
      • Estate Planning
    • COLUM2
      • Government Procurement and Contracts
      • Insurance and Reinsurance
      • Intellectual Property
      • Immigration Law
      • Corporate Services
    • COLUM3
      • Labor Law
      • Litigation and Dispute Resolution
      • Mergers and Acquisitions
      • Mining
      • Projects
    • COLUM4
      • Real Estate
      • Securities and Capital Markets
      • Shipping and Admiralty Litigation
      • Ship Finance and Registration
      • Taxation
  • Experience
  • News
  • Pro Bono
  • Sustainability
    • ESG Strategy
    • Environment
    • Social
    • Governance
    • Annual Report
      • Sustainability Report 2023
      • Sustainability Report 2022
      • Sustainability Report 2021
    • Sustainability Policy
  • Contact us
  • Payment Methods
    • Credit Card
    • ACH Payment
    • Wire Transfers

Morgan & Morgan wins another Trademark Opposition in Belize

Thursday, 14 April 2011 / Published in Intellectual Property_news, Rishi Mungal

Morgan & Morgan wins another Trademark Opposition in Belize

Intellectual Property law continues to develop progressively as the Belize Intellectual Property Office has issued its latest opposition ruling in the matter of British American Tobacco (Brands) Limited v. Philip Morris Products S.A.(Application No. 5754.08).

This matter dealt with an opposition lodged by British American Tobacco against a trademark application filed by Philip Morris on the issue of distinctiveness, and lack thereof. British American Tobacco argued that the Philip Morris mark in question contravened the Trade Marks Act, Chapter 257 of the Laws of Belize, Revised Edition 2000, in particular section 35(1)(b) which states:

“The following shall not be registered… trademarks which are devoid of any distinctive character…Provided that, a trade mark shall not be refused registration by virtue of [section 35(1)(b)] if, before the date of application for registration, it has in fact acquired a distinctive character as a result of the use made of it.”

The Deputy Registrar of Belipo, upon hearing the submissions of counsel on behalf of both parties found that the Philip Morris mark was neither distinctive as it was incapable of distinguishing the goods to which it had applied, nor had it acquired distinctive use within the meaning of the Trade Marks Act.

BAT has not only conducted a successful opposition against Philip Morris, it has also achieved victory in defending an opposition brought against it by Philip Morris in the prior matter of Philip Morris Products S.A. v British American Tobacco (Brands) Limited (Application No.5082.07). A victory which was confirmed in the landmark judgment of Civil Appeal 1 of 2009, the very first trade mark opposition that was appealed to conclusion at the Belize Supreme Court with one of the last judgments issued by Belize’s former eminent Chief Justice Dr. Abdulai Conteh.

Morgan Belize, through Legal Counsel Rishi Alain Mungal, was pleased to represent its client, British American Tobacco at the opposition proceedings and assist with this successful decision.

A full text of British American Tobacco (Brands) Limited v. Philip Morris Products S.A.(Application No. 5754.08) is available here.

La Ley de Propiedad Intelectual continua desarrollándose progresivamente al momento en que la Oficina de Propiedad Intelectual de Belice emite su última sentencia de oposición en el caso de British American Tobacco (Brands) Limited vs. Philip Morris Products S.A. (Solicitud no. 5754.08).

Este asunto trata de una demanda de oposición presentada por British American Tobacco contra una solicitud de marca de fábrica presentada por Philip Morris concerniente al tema del carácter distintivo o falta del mismo. British American Tobacco argumentó que la marca de Philip Morris en cuestión iba contra la Ley de Marcas de Fábrica, Capítulo 257 de las Leyes de Belice, Versión Actualizada del 2000, en especial la sección 35(1)(b) la cual estipula:

“No deberá registrarse lo siguiente… marcas de fábrica que carezcan de un carácter distintivo… Siempre que, el registro de una marca de fábrica no se rechace en virtud de la [sección 35(1)(b)] si, previo a la fecha de solicitud de registro, ésta ha de hecho adquirido un carácter distintivo como resultado del uso que se hace de ella.”

El Sub Registrador de Propiedad Intelectual de Belice, al escuchar las presentaciones de los abogados en nombre de ambas partes encontró que la marca Philip Morris no era ni distintiva ya que no podía distinguir los artículos a los que había aplicado, ni había adquirido un uso distintivo dentro del significado de la Ley de Marcas de Fábrica.

BAT no solo llevó a cabo una oposición exitosa contra Philip Morris sino que también alcanzó la victoria en la defensa de una demanda de oposición presentada contra ella por Philip Morris en la acción anterior de Philip Morris Products S.A. vs. British American Tobacco (Brands) Limited (Solicitud no. 5082.07). Una victoria confirmada en una sentencia sin precedentes de la Apelación Civil 1 del 2009, la primera demanda de oposición de marca de fábrica apelada hasta su conclusión en la Corte Suprema de Belice, uno de cuyos últimos fallos fue emitido por el eminente ex Presidente de la Corte Suprema de Belice, Dr. Abdulai Conteh.

Morgan Belice a través de su asesor legal Rishi Alain Mungal se sintió complacida de representar a su cliente, British American Tobacco en el proceso de oposición y asistir en la exitosa decisión.

El texto completo de British American Tobacco (Brands) Limited vs. Philip Morris Products S.A. (Solicitud no. 5754.08) está disponible aquí.

  • Tweet

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Search

Latest news

  • JAZMINA-1

    Jazmina Rovi on Maritime Reform, Inclusion & Global Legal Impact – TerraLex Insights Podcast

  • fRAN

    The use of artificial intelligence by lawyers in Panama

  • 6001

    Morgan & Morgan advised Bank of China Limited, Panama Branch, in connection with the issuance of US$500 million Floating Rate Notes.

  • migra34

    Recognition of the validity of Venezuelan passports in Panamanian territory and Certification of Status and Electronic Migration Movement

  • miguel-y-ana

    Morgan & Morgan advised on the sale of two solar plants.

Contact our experts

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Morgan & Morgan
  • Home
  • About us
  • Associates
  • Partners
  • Founders
  • Practice Areas
  • Transactions
  • News
  • Contact us
  • Terms of use
  • Data Protection Policy
  • Whistleblowing System “Your Voice”
  • Compliance Policy
  • FAQ’s
  • Disclaimer
  • Global Reach
  • Gender Equity

© 2023 All rights reserved. Morgan & Morgan. MMG Tower, 23rd Floor Ave. Paseo del Mar, Costa del Este Panama City Rep. of Panama.

TOP