Argentina: Actions for recovery of IP rights
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

Argentina: Actions for recovery of IP rights

As explained in previous briefings, the new Civil and Commercial Code includes a series of rules referring, either directly or indirectly, to intellectual and industrial property matters which we have already reviewed in detail.

An important aspect that the new Civil Code affects is that related to actions for recovery regarding immaterial goods. In particular, we refer to the action for recovery in relation to trade marks.

The aim of the action for recovery is to obtain the restitution of the trade mark to its lawful owner. Trade Mark Law No 22,362 mentions the action for recovery in Section 11 but it does not expand on its regulation.

In the case of other immaterial rights, such as industrial models and designs, the action for recovery is specifically foreseen.

Likewise, it is understood that in the Patent Law, Section 31 establishes the setting that enables the exercise of the action for recovery when it states: "The granting of the patent shall be done with no prejudice to a third party with a better right than that of the applicant, and with no guarantee from the State concerning the usefulness of its object."

Until the new Civil and Commercial Code came into force (August 1 2015), the courts accepted lawsuits related to actions for recovery of trade marks, based on a broad interpretation of Section 11 of the Trade Mark Law.

However, Section 16 of the new code regarding goods does not mention immaterial goods, and Section 2253 expressly excludes immaterial goods from the possibility of being protected by the action for recovery.

Taking into account the new rules of the Civil and Commercial Code, now the question is how the case law related to actions for recovery will evolve.

Daniel R Zuccherino

Obligado & Cia

Paraguay 610, 17th Floor

C1057AAH, Buenos Aires, Argentina

Tel: +54 11 4114 1100

Fax: +54 11 4311 5675

admin@obligado.com.ar

www.obligado.com

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

High-earning businesses place most value on the depth of the external legal teams advising them, according to a survey of nearly 29,000 in-house counsel
Kilpatrick Townsend was recognised as Americas firm of the year, while patent powerhouse James Haley won a lifetime achievement award
Partners at Foley Hoag and Kilburn & Strode explore how US and UK courts have addressed questions of AI and inventorship
In-house lawyers have considerable influence over law firms’ actions, so they must use that power to push their external advisers to adopt sustainable practices
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Counsel say they’re advising clients to keep a close eye on confidentiality agreements after the FTC voted to ban non-competes
Data from Managing IP+’s Talent Tracker shows US firms making major swoops for IP teams, while South Korea has also been a buoyant market
The finalists for the 13th annual awards have been announced
Counsel reveal how a proposal to create separate briefings for discretionary denials at the USPTO could affect their PTAB strategies
The UK Supreme Court rejected the firm’s appeal against an earlier ruling because it did not raise an arguable point of law
Gift this article