France: Analysing the rules around bad faith in trade mark cases

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

France: Analysing the rules around bad faith in trade mark cases

Sponsored by

beau-de-lomenie.png

In France, a prior right holder cannot oppose a trade mark based on bad faith.

A nullity action on the basis of bad faith can be brought in court. Bad faith is a general course of action which is not specifically detailed in the French Intellectual Property Code. The rule "bad faith corrupts everything" means that one can always bring an action in court against bad faith behaviour and therefore against any trade mark filed in bad faith.

Bad faith also has an impact on prescription. The holder of a prior right may bring a nullity action against a trade mark based on relative grounds. However, the five years acquiescence rule does not apply when the trade mark was filed in bad faith. The same rule applies in cases of infringement.

In addition, the five year prescription for invalidity actions concerning well-known trade marks (Article 6bis of the Paris Convention) does not apply in cases of bad faith. As a result, when an application is filed in bad faith, the action of the prior right holder cannot be prescribed.

Article 5(4)(c) of EU Directive 2436/2015 states: "Any Member State may provide that a trade mark is not to be registered, or, if registered, is liable to be declared invalid where, and to the extent that the trade mark is liable to be confused with an earlier trade mark protected abroad, provided that, at the date of the application, the applicant was acting in bad faith." This Directive must be implemented in France no later than January 14 2019.

There is no information for the moment as to whether an action will be introduced in France. However, if bad faith can be proved in French territory, there is a ground for action in court. Finally, there is, up to now, no information about how nullity actions filed before the Office will be dealt with in France.

Aurélia Marie


Cabinet Beau de Loménie

158, rue de l’Université

F - 75340 Paris Cedex 07 France

Tel: +33 1 44 18 89 00

Fax: +33 1 44 18 04 23

contact@bdl-ip.com

www.bdl-ip.com

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

In the first of a two-part article, lawyers at Spruson & Ferguson and Marshall Gerstein provide an overview of China’s system for appealing against patent invalidation decisions
Lawyers and corporate leaders at INTA’s Business of M&A conference in New York discussed how cross-practice collaboration and early in-house involvement can help deals
Lily Li, partner at Morrison Foerster, shares how her litigation team helped secure victory at the ITC in a patent infringement case
Top talking points also included news of an appellate ruling concerning ‘Pisco’ and Indian drugmakers gearing up to launch generic versions of Ozempic as Novo Nordisk’s patent expires
The government’s keenly awaited view on AI and copyright has positive themes but leaves rights owners wanting, says Rebecca Newman at Addleshaw Goddard
While IP Australia’s updated manual could be favourable to computer-implemented inventions, stakeholders would like to see whether a consistent and reliable standard is followed during actual examination
UKIPO will remain a competitive option as long as efficient service continues
A future opt-out has not been ruled out, but practitioners warn that the UK could fall behind in the AI race
US patent lawyers say they are increasingly advising clients on China strategies as corporations seek to gain leverage in enforcement, licensing, and supply chain management
Mike Rueckheim reunites with 12 of his former Winston & Strawn colleagues as King & Spalding continues aggressive hiring streak
Gift this article