Select Country

Select a country to view information on local trademark law

A-E  F-J  K-O  P-T  U-Z

Multinational Agreements

Get Listed

Promote your expertise to IP professionals worldwide.
read more

Show Articles

Subscribe to Free Newsletter

To keep updated on the latest amendments to international trademark laws click here


Print this page
Editha R. Hechanova, Hechanova & Co., Inc., Philippines
Show Partner Info

Proposed Amendments to the IP Code-Trademark

Editha R. Hechanova, Hechanova & Co., Inc., PhilippinesThe Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL) has submitted to the Philippine Congress its proposed amendments to the IP Code (Republic Act No. 8293). Some of the major amendments affecting the law on trademarks are for example expanding the functions and express powers of the Bureau of Legal Affairs (BLA) which is the adjudication arm of the IPOPHL to include: (a) to declare marks as well-known, as well as the power to revoke said declarations, (b) declaration of ownership or having the right to  read more

Laurie Smith, J A Kemp, United Kingdom
First published on

Sieckmann Strikes Again – EUIPO Board of Appeal Cancels...

Laurie Smith, J A Kemp, United Kingdom, First published on www.jakemp.comThe EUIPO Board of Appeal recently upheld a request for a declaration of invalidity against the following grey/orange colour combination trade mark, on the grounds that its imprecision allows for multiple different combinations of the two colours. The case involved a variety of arguments from the parties relating to inherent and acquired distinctiveness, use of a mark in conjunction with another mark, bad faith, infringement and counterfeit goods. In the end, however, the decision of the Board of Appeal turned on a simple question: does the mark meet the  read more

Meaghan H. Kent, Venable LLP, USA
Briana C. Rizzo, Venable LLP, USA
First published on

Louboutin v. Van Haren: Why Louboutin Isn’t Seeing Red ...

Meaghan H. Kent, Venable LLP, USA, Briana C. Rizzo, Venable LLP, USA, First published on www.venable.comOn February 6, 2018, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) Advocate General Szpunar handed down a nonbinding opinion on the validity of Christian Louboutin’s “Red Sole” trademark registration within the European Union. Additional Opinion of Advocate General Szpunar, Christian Louboutin et al. v. Van Haren Schoenen BV, C-163/16 (translated version available here). This decision comes after years of litigation between Louboutin and Dutch footwear company Van Haren, in which Louboutin alleges Van Haren’s “Fifth Avenue by Halle Berry” footwear collection infringes its “Red Sole” mark, and Van Haren, in turn, alleges that Louboutin’s “Red Sole” registration is not valid under EU law. Originally filed in the District Court of the Hague, an appealed injunction ruling has brought this case before Europe’s highest court, the CJEU.
In June, AG Szpunar determined that Louboutin’s “Red Sole” mark qualifies as a “shape mark,” or “a mark consisting of the shape of the goods and seeking protection for a color in relation to
 read more

Maylee Savournin, OMC Abogados & Consultores, Peru

The olfactory brands in the legal business world

Maylee Savournin, OMC Abogados & Consultores, PeruNowadays, the high competitiveness of the market has encouraged businessmen to use all available technical progress to the implementation and evolution of a product, therefore this process is generally accompanied by enormous efforts of research and development. However, positioning a product or service in the market does not only depend on its inner characteristics, but consumer’s loyalty must be achieved, for which the use of all kinds of incentive is required to attract their attention. That is why the unconventional signals read more

Peter W. Choe, Gowling WLG, Canada
First published on

Promotional use is not use of a trademark

Peter W. Choe, Gowling WLG, Canada , First published on www.gowlingwlg.comIn a recent decision of the Federal Court in Riches, McKenzie & Herbert LLP v. Cosmetic Warriors Limited (2018 FC 63) available here, Justice Manson allowed the appeal of the decision of the Registrar of Trademarks, thus overturning the finding that the Respondent had demonstrated use of the trademark LUSH in association with t-shirts. Cosmetic Warriors (the “Respondent”) owns the  read more

Chew Kherk Ying, Wong & Partners, Malaysia
Woo Wai Teng, Wong & Partners, Malaysia
First published on

Malaysian Federal Court Rules On The Evidence of Non-Us...

Chew Kherk Ying, Wong & Partners, Malaysia, Woo Wai Teng, Wong & Partners, Malaysia, First published on www.wongpartners.comAt the first instance of the delicious saga of Oishi Group Public Company Ltd v Liwayway Marketing Corporation [2015] 2 CLJ 1121, Oishi Group Public Company Ltd ("Oishi"), a manufacturer and producer of beverages bearing the OISHI mark, had successfully expunged Liwayway Marketing Corporation's ("Liwayway") OISHI mark in Class 30 and 43 from the Register of Trade Marks ("Register"). The order for expungement is premised on the following grounds on non-use under Section 46 of the Malaysian Trade Marks Act 1976 ("the Act"); and that the entries were made without sufficient cause and wrongfully remained on the Register - the term OISHI relates to surnames of prominent Japanese, bears reference to the goods i.e. food and drinks, and has a well known dictionary meaning. The High Court held that Oishi had established a prima facie case of non-use via the market survey report and Liwayway failed to prove use. The invoices provided by Liwayway in support of the use of the mark was rejected as  read more

Robert L. Eisenbach III, Of Counsel, Cooley LLP, USA
First published on

Throwing Shade At Sunbeam: Following Lubrizol And Not T...

Robert L. Eisenbach III, Of Counsel, Cooley LLP, USA, First published on www.lexology.comThe Tempnology Trademark Saga: When it comes to decisions on bankruptcy and trademark licenses, the In re Tempnology LLC bankruptcy case is the gift that keeps on giving. It all started in November 2015. Following Tempnology’s rejection of an agreement containing a trademark licensee, the New Hampshire Bankruptcy Court ruled that the licensee could no longer use the licensed trademarks. The Bankruptcy Court followed the Fourth Circuit’s 1985 decision in Lubrizol Enterprises, Inc. v. Richmond Metal Finishers read more

Hechanova & Co. Inc.


Ground Floor Salustiana D. Ty Tower, 104 Paseo de Roxas Avenue, Legaspi, Village
1229 Makati City
Philippines (PH)
Tel +63 2 888 4293
Fax +63 2 888 4290

Hechanova & Co., Inc. was established in December 12, 2005 by intellectual property lawyer Editha Hechanova and friends Fe Belen Bello, a chemical engineer, Dr. Jimmy Masagca, a biologist, and sisters Noemi Rivera, a certified public accountant and Brenda Rivera, an economist and logistics expert. From a group of six professionals, it has grown to twenty specialists and technical staff, with two certified patent agents, having passed the Patent Agent Qualifying Examination (PAQE) conducted by the Intellectual Property Office. The company specializes in the prosecution of patents and trademarks, copyright registration, domain name registration, providing patent and trademark search services, renewal services, customs recordation, registration with the Food and Drug Administration, plant variety protection, and litigation support services. It is affiliated with the law offices of Hechanova Bugay & Vilchez which handle the contentious aspects of intellectual property protection such as enforcements, opposition and cancellation proceedings, litigation, due diligence service, and licensing.

Chemphil Bldg., 851 Antonio Arnaiz Ave.,
Makati City 1223 Philippines
Tel. No.: 632-888-4293/812-6561
Fax No.: 632-888-4290/893-5878