Russia: Manchester in London, Chicago in St Petersburg

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

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

Russia: Manchester in London, Chicago in St Petersburg

J.S.S.Tobacco Ltd., a London company, filed a trademark application with the Russian Patents and Trademarks Office

manchester-96.jpg

The application was refused because the examiner opined that the word element "Manchester", a city in North West England points to the place of production of the goods or the location of the applicant.

At the time of filing the trademark application, the address of the applicant was indicated as "London". The word element of the trademark "Manchester" is also a city. Hence, it was stated in the decision of the patent office that this was misleading for consumers with regard to the location of the manufacturer of goods or their place of production.

The applicant understood the situation and appealed the decision. He informed the patent office in his appeal that his address had changed to Centenary Way, Trafford Park, Manchester, M50 1RF. The Chamber of Patent Disputes stated that the applicant exercised his right and made amendments to his trademark application. The change of address removed the reasons for rejecting the trademark application so that the Chamber could recognise that the registration did not contradict the law. The Chamber pointed out that the word element "Manchester" is part of the claimed designation. It is the name of the city in England and characterises the place for production of goods. Hence the registration should be allowed.

In connection with this, one may recall another registration, Chicago LLC.

chicago.jpg

The registration was refused and appealed by the applicant at the same Chamber of Patent Disputes. At that time, it was decided that the word "Chicago" would not mislead consumers (visitors of the beauty parlour) even though the applicant did not change his place of residence (Sankt-Petersburg, Russia).

In the "Manchester" case, the applicant found an easy way to obviate the risk of refusal.

biriulin.jpg

Vladimir Biriulin

Gorodissky & Partners

Russia 129010, Moscow

B. Spasskaya Str

25, stroenie 3

Tel: +7 495 937 6116 / 6109

Fax: +7 495 937 6104 / 6123

pat@gorodissky.ru 

www.gorodissky.com

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Yossi Sivan explains how Israeli judgment is a pro-brand owner departure from the norm and why it sends a strong message that corporate structures are not always a shield
Halim Shehadeh, group CEO of IP firm CWB, says that in the rush to discuss what AI can do, IP firms are overlooking the more important question of whether they are ready
Caitlin Heard, who formally joined the firm from CMS last month, says she is excited by the ‘energy’ of the London office
Ranjna Mehta-Dutt, who moved to Chadha & Chadha after 25 years at Remfry & Sagar, says the firm plans to expand its life sciences practice through targeted recruitment and dedicated teams for bigger clients
The initial contempt of court claim targeted Stobbs and the firm’s client for allegedly interfering with the administration of justice
Acquisition of platform developed by Boehmert & Boehmert lawyer set to create a combined platform for patent drafting and prosecution in Europe
Partner Rob Jacob unveils plans to offer a beginning-to-end trademark service, how to make prosecution profitable, and why IP ‘buy-in’ from the CEO stands the firm in good stead
Attorneys at Di Blasi, Parente & Associados share how the protection of trade secrets strengthens innovation by bringing together legal practice, regulatory developments, and established international references
Jin Ooi, who joins as a partner today, said he is excited to offer a ‘rounded’ IP service as the firm deepens its litigation expertise in the UK and Europe
As generics celebrate, practitioners believe innovator companies should brace for an ‘uphill battle’ when trying to prove induced infringement
Gift this article