Title
Shang Properties Realty Corp. vs. St. Francis Development Corp.
Case
G.R. No. 190706
Decision Date
Jul 21, 2014
Real estate developers dispute over "ST. FRANCIS" mark; Supreme Court rules it geographically descriptive, no unfair competition.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 224972)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Parties and Background
  • Respondent St. Francis Development Corporation (SFDC) is a domestic real estate developer. Since 1992 it has used the mark “ST. FRANCIS” for projects in Ortigas Center, Mandaluyong City (e.g., St. Francis Square Commercial Center, St. Francis Square Mall, St. Francis Towers).
  • Petitioners Shang Properties Realty Corporation and Shang Properties, Inc. (formerly The Shang Grand Tower Corp. and Edsa Properties Holdings, Inc.) developed competing real estate projects in Ortigas Center under the marks “THE ST. FRANCIS TOWERS” and “THE ST. FRANCIS SHANGRI-LA PLACE.”
  • Proceedings Before the IPO
  • SFDC filed:
    • IPV Case No. 10-2005-00030 for unfair competition, false or fraudulent declaration, and damages based on petitioners’ use of the “ST. FRANCIS” marks.
    • Inter Partes Case No. 14-2006-00098 opposing registration of “THE ST. FRANCIS TOWERS.”
    • Inter Partes Case No. 14-2007-00218 opposing registration of “THE ST. FRANCIS SHANGRI-LA PLACE.”
  • BLA Decisions:
    • December 19, 2006 (IPV Case): Found unfair competition for “THE ST. FRANCIS TOWERS” but not for “THE ST. FRANCIS SHANGRI-LA PLACE”; ruled “ST. FRANCIS” an arbitrary mark in real estate and enjoined petitioners.
    • March 28, 2007 (St. Francis Towers IP Case): Denied registration of “THE ST. FRANCIS TOWERS” as confusingly similar to SFDC’s DTI-registered “ST. FRANCIS” marks.
    • March 31, 2008 (St. Francis Shangri-La IP Case): Allowed registration of “THE ST. FRANCIS SHANGRI-LA PLACE,” finding no exclusivity in SFDC’s use and sufficient distinction by “Shangri-La.”
  • IPO Director-General Decision (September 3, 2008):
    • Affirmed denial of “THE ST. FRANCIS TOWERS.”
    • Dismissed unfair competition charge for that mark, holding “ST. FRANCIS” geographically descriptive (Ortigas Center streets).
    • Upheld registration of “THE ST. FRANCIS SHANGRI-LA PLACE” and no unfair competition.
  • Court of Appeals Decision (December 18, 2009):
    • Found petitioners guilty of unfair competition for both marks.
    • Ordered cease-and-desist from using “ST. FRANCIS” singly or in composite and a joint fine of ₱200,000.
  • Supreme Court Petition
  • Petitioners filed a petition for certiorari, assailing the CA’s finding of unfair competition.
  • With the inter partes decisions final, the only issue before the Supreme Court was the unfair competition charge under the IPV Case.

Issues:

  • Whether petitioners’ use of the marks “THE ST. FRANCIS TOWERS” and “THE ST. FRANCIS SHANGRI-LA PLACE” constitutes unfair competition under Section 168 of the Intellectual Property Code.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.