Argentina: Actions for recovery of IP rights

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

Cookies Settings

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 SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Eight years after its launch, members of the Australian patent firm’s Singapore office explain its growth strategy over the past year
Lawyers at Bowmans Kenya discuss the digital blind spots posed by the transition from physical ledgers to cloud databases and digital co-development models
The Powell Gilbert co-founder discusses the confidence required to launch a firm, building an enduring patent litigation practice and why developing the next generation has changed her measure of success
Cabinet M Oproiu’s Raluca Vasilescu explains why AI is changing what clients expect from patent attorneys, where the technology is overhyped and what the next generation will need to do differently
As clients demand more flexible fees and AI-driven efficiencies, IP firms are rethinking pricing without abandoning the value of their work
HG Law was formed largely by ex Fish & Neave lawyers who left after the latter's merger with Ropes & Gray; now those experiences are shaping its latest combination
David Rodrigues and Evan Lazerowitz – attorneys at Robinson & Cole – offer practical guidance on the steps a business might consider to preserve and maximise IP value before entering financial distress or insolvency
Daniel Law CEO Alicia Daniel-Shores may have stepped into a family business, but she has spent two decades building her own vision around technology and litigation
Law firms don't particularly like saying no to clients. Perhaps they should get better at it
The office, which has a relatively new patent litigation team as well as a wider ‘soft’ IP offering, would remain independent if the rejection is rubberstamped
Gift this article