The evidential groundwork for litigation success
Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

The evidential groundwork for litigation success

It’s never too early to collect the evidence that will win your trademark case, as Emma Barraclough finds out.

Trademark cases are not won on the day of the trial. Nor are they won on the day a killer lawsuit is served. As many experienced litigators will have learned, the groundwork for winning a trademark case begins years, sometimes decades, earlier.

Panelists in a session today on gathering evidence will underline the importance of pulling together and maintaining evidence for use in trademark litigation, well before litigation is contemplated. “You really can lose cases before IP offices and in the courts without sufficient evidence”, says Carsten Albrecht of FPS Fritze Wicke Seelig in Germany, who is moderating today’s session. “It is a good idea to collect evidence at as part of portfolio management”.

Longines v Staccata

The panelists will consider some high-profile cases where legal battles have been lost for want of proof of use of a trademark, or because of insufficient evidence of the use of a mark in a particular form.

One recent example is a dispute between Swiss watch maker Longines and Italy’s Staccata. The Swiss company objected to Staccato’s application to register a figurative mark that included a wings device along with the word QUARTODIMIGLIO. The objection was based on its own trademarks, some of which consisted solely of a wings device, and some of a wings device with the word LONGINES.

In February, the General Court in Luxembourg backed OHIM’s Board of Appeal, which had found that Longines had not succeeded in proving the existence of a reputation for its “winged hourglass” device on its own, independently of the mark LONGINES.

Types of evidence

So what kind of evidence should IP owners stockpile to prove their trademark claims? Albrecht suggests they build up evidence of use of at least the most important trademarks in their portfolio, bringing together packaging designs and labels as well as figures showing the amount spent on advertising.

“OHIM and the General Court also like to see copies of invoices showing the trademark,” he says.

Easy access to the evidence is important so that litigation teams can find, analyze and submit it within tight litigation timetables.

In a digital era, the job of evidence collection and archiving should be easier, allowing IP owners to keep records online and scan copies of documents and examples of packaging. But Albrecht says that while the German courts are relatively relaxed about the submission of scanned documents, the UK courts might be more suspicious. “British lawyers have told me that the courts in London might expect the parties to be able to produce witnesses to the scanning process. It is important to consider evidence gathering on a global basis”.

Another headache for trademark lawyers is the trend for IP owners to use their marks in dynamic ways. This trend is often driven by the marketing department, but their colleagues in the legal team should be aware of the potential problems that regular changes to the way the trademark is presented might have for litigation success down the line. “In Europe the IP owner needs to be able to show that the mark has been used in the registered form, or with only slight changes to it,” warns Albrecht.

The other members of the panel are Richard Groos of Norton Rose Fulbright in the United States, Paul Harris of Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman in the UK and Anna-Lena Wolfe of Tetra Pak in Sweden.

CT01 Gathering Evidence with In-house Counsel: Achieving Harmony and Avoiding Discord takes place from 10:15 am to 11:30 pm today.

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

A 36-member team from Zhong Lun Law Firm, including six partners, will join the newly formed East IP Group
The Delhi High Court sided with Ericsson against Indian smartphone maker Lava, bringing the companies' nine-year dispute to a close
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Tennessee has passed the ELVIS Act, a law that fights against AI models that mimic the voice and likeness of music artists
Rob Stien, chief communications and public policy officer at InterDigital, says the EU has forgotten innovators while trying to solve an issue that doesn’t exist
As Australia’s Qantm IP leans towards being acquired by a private equity company, sources discuss what it could mean for IP firms
Law firms that are conscious of their role in society are more likely to win work, according to a survey of over 23,000 in-house professionals
Nghiem Xuan Bac Pham, managing partner of Vision & Associates, discusses opportunities created by the US-China rift as well as profitability issues facing IP practices
Douglas Leite and two of his colleagues were intrigued by Bhering Advogados’s mission to grow its patent litigation practice
Each week Managing IP speaks to a different IP practitioner about their life and career
Gift this article