Case Summary (G.R. No. L-53672)
Facts of the Case
On October 27, 1980, the initial petition seeking to annul the previous decision of the Philippine Patent Office was denied for lack of merit. Following this, the petitioner moved for reconsideration. The Philippine Patent Office was addressing Inter Partes Case No. 654, wherein New Olympian Rubber Products Co., Inc. applied for the trademark registration of "BATA," claiming usage since July 1, 1970. Bata Industries, Ltd. opposed this registration, insisting it held rights to the trademark and had not abandoned it.
Evidence and Findings
The proceedings revealed that Bata shoes, originally made in Czechoslovakia, were sold in the Philippines prior to World War II, while some products from Bata of Canada were possibly sold until 1948. Notably, the trademark "BATA" had never been registered in the Philippines by any foreign entity. Consequently, the Philippine Patent Office concluded that Bata Industries, Ltd. had technically abandoned its trademark rights in the Philippines. On the other hand, it found that New Olympian Rubber Products Co., Inc. had adequately established its right to the trademark through significant promotion and use since 1970. Additionally, the company had secured copyright registrations for the word "BATA," which it claimed had cultural significance as a Tagalog term meaning "a little child."
Court of Appeals Decision
Bata Industries, Ltd. appealed the Philippine Patent Office's decision to the Court of Appeals, which initially reversed the lower decision. However, a subsequent reconsideration led to a ruling that reinstated the original decision of the Director of Patents, affirming New Olympian Rubber Products Co., Inc.'s right to the "BATA" trademark.
Legal Issues Raised
The petitioner contended that the new decision from a different panel of justices was improper, questioning the validity of the changed outcome. The Court addressed this concern, stating that nothing is inherently wrong in a different set of justices reviewing a decision since it allows for a fresh analysis unbound by prior conclusions.
Conclusion of the
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. L-53672)
Case Background
- The case revolves around a trademark dispute involving the mark "BATA" for casual rubber shoes.
- New Olympian Rubber Products Co., Inc. filed for the registration of the trademark "BATA" on October 27, 1980, claiming usage since July 1, 1970.
- Bata Industries, Ltd., a Canadian corporation, opposed the registration, asserting that it owns the trademark "BATA" and has not abandoned it.
Key Stipulations
- Bata Industries, Ltd. does not have a license to conduct business in the Philippines.
- The company is not currently selling footwear under the trademark "BATA" in the Philippines.
- There is no licensing agreement with any local entity or firm for the sale of its products in the Philippines.
Historical Context of Trademark Use
- Evidence presented indicated that Bata shoes were sold in the Philippines before World War II, specifically by Gerbec and Hrdina of Czechoslovakia, with some sales of Bata Canada shoes noted until 1948.
- The trademark "BATA" was never registered in the Philippines by any foreign entity, leading to the conclusion of technical abandonment by Bata Industries, Ltd.
Findings of the Philippine Patent Office
- The Philippine Patent Office determined that New Olympian Rubber Products Co., Inc. had conv