G.R. No. 103543 - Asia Brewery, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals

On September 15, 1988, San Miguel Corporation (SMC) filed a complaint in RTC Branch 166, Pasig City (Civ. Case No. 56390) against Asia Brewery Inc. (ABI) for trademark infringement and unfair competition concerning ABI’s “Beer Pale Pilsen” vis-à-vis SMC’s “San Miguel Pale Pilsen.”
On August 27, 1990, the trial court (Judge Jesus O. Bersamira) dismissed SMC’s complaint, finding no infringement or unfair competition.
SMC appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA-G.R. CV No. 28104). On September 30, 1991, the Sixth Division reversed and ordered injunctive relief, product recall, accounting and damages.
Upon ABI’s motion for reconsideration, a Special Sixth Division modified the CA decision by eliminating the P5,000,000 accounting order but maintained the injunction, recall, and damages awards.
ABI filed a petition for certiorari under Rule 45 before the Supreme Court.

Amber-colored steinie bottle, 320 ml capacity; white rectangular label bordered by hop and grain designs.
Dominant feature: “San Miguel Pale Pilsen” in white Gothic letters; coat of arms; “Expertly Brewed”; “Bottled by San Miguel Brewery Philippines.”

Amber-colored steinie bottle, 320 ml capacity; white rectangular label bordered by flower buds.
Dominant feature: “Beer” in large amber letters; “Pale Pilsen” in block letters; hop design; “Especially brewed and bottled by Asia Brewery Incorporated Philippines.”

The sole issue is whether ABI’s Beer Pale Pilsen infringes SMC’s trademark and constitutes unfair competition.
Trial court and CA reached conflicting findings on the factual issue. The Supreme Court invoked exceptions to deference on appellate findings and reviewed the evidence de novo.

Does ABI’s use of the mark “Beer Pale Pilsen” infringe SMC’s registered trademark “San Miguel Pale Pilsen With Rectangular Hops and Malt Design”?
Does ABI’s marketing and labeling of Beer Pale Pilsen constitute unfair competition under R.A. 166, as amended?