OAPI and national TM issues clarified

OAPI and national TM issues clarified

The constitution of OAPI was the 1977 Bangui Agreement. Each OAPI member adopts, as its national IP laws, the detailed provisions set out in the Agreement (OAPI laws). The founder members of OAPI were Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Gabon, Ivory Coast, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal and Togo. Mali acceded in 1984, Guinea in 1990, Guinea-Bissau in 1998 and Equatorial Guinea in 2000.

The tidy OAPI landscape contained islands of uncertainty surrounding the accession of new member states. One was the extension of existing OAPI rights into acceding countries. The other was the fate of existing national registrations in one new member, Guinea. The issues have become clearer but have not been settled beyond doubt.

Extending rights to acceding countries

OAPI laws provided clearly for OAPI registrations, dated after the accession of a new member state, to be effective in the new member's territory. But they originally contained no guidance about the extension of OAPI rights into acceding states.

A Regulation was made on December 4 1998 and supplemented by several resolutions and announcements between 2003 and 2009. Those OAPI Statements provided for extending OAPI registrations, existing on accession of a new member, into the acceding state. There were two phases:

  1. The 1998 Regulation permitted voluntary applications by the owners of OAPI registrations, to extend their effects into acceding territories.

  2. Subsequent OAPI Statements declared that the renewal of an OAPI registration resulted in the automatic extension of its effects into those territories which had joined by the renewal date.

The validity and effects of the OAPI Statements have been extensively debated and we now consider they can be relied on as follows:

  1. Applications for voluntary extension of OAPI rights into acceding members, already duly filed with OAPI and granted by it, are effective.

  2. Every OAPI registration renewed after December 4 1998 is deemed by OAPI to have been extended to all states, being members at the date of renewal. This means that all OAPI registrations now subsisting are deemed to be in force in Mali, Guinea and Guinea-Bissau, which had joined before that date.

  3. Equatorial Guinea did not join until November 23 2000, so OAPI registrations made or renewed before that date are not enforceable in Equatorial Guinea.

  4. Apart from any Equatorial Guinea cases mentioned in (3) above, all extension applications which have been made to OAPI and which are still pending, are superfluous. They can be withdrawn and the official fees are recoverable. They will not be completed by OAPI.

Guinea – effect of accession on existing registrations

After Guinea joined OAPI in 1990, the national registry (Greffe) continued to accept renewals and post-registration transactions affecting existing Guinea registrations.

The OAPI Statements included a provision that existing national registrations were to last only until their next renewal dates. This was ignored by the Guinea authorities and so the renewals of existing Guinea registrations as well as recordals of assignments etc continued.

However, if the OAPI Statements are accepted under OAPI law, applicable in Guinea, Guinea renewals made after December 4 1998 are invalid. No renewal application should now be acceptable. The last subsisting registrations will expire by December 3 2013.

Meanwhile, it is thought that the Greffe has finally stopped issuing certificates of renewal, etc but this is not certain because all communications with the Greffe have been lost.

That bad news is balanced by the good news in that all OAPI registrations now subsisting are deemed to be in force in Guinea. Owners should rely on OAPI registrations for protection in Guinea as well as the other 15 member states. If a registration appears to exist in Guinea and not in OAPI, that situation calls for a serious review.

Guinea – extending existing national registrations to OAPI

The OAPI Statements allow the owners of registrations, subsisting in Guinea when it acceded to OAPI, to apply to OAPI for the effects of those registrations to be extended to the whole of OAPI. A number of extension applications were made, of which some have been completed. The remainder are expected to be finalised by OAPI in due course.

spence-mac.jpg

Mac Spence


Spoor & Fisher Jersey

Africa House, Castle Street

St Helier, Jersey JE4 9TW

Channel Islands

Tel: +44 1534 838000

Fax: +44 1534 838001

info@spoor.co.uk

www.spoor.com

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Varuni Paranavitane says she is excited to bring ‘rounded expertise’ to the firm, which will have a solicitor in its ranks for the first time
Lawyers adapting to AI-driven recommendations are being pushed to demonstrate expertise publicly rather than simply relying on a polished website
Mid-market businesses looking to establish an online presence need ‘holistic’ brand protection services at an accessible cost, according to partners
Our latest update also includes the latest case filing statistics, and an update on how a transatlantic merger could be a UPC opportunity for the US half of the partnership
New partners, from biotech company Leyden Labs and Novartis, take the total number of partner hires to 12 since the firm took on external investment in late 2024
Labelled the ‘largest law firm merger in history’, the new outfit could also spell an opportunity for US clients to capitalise on Hogan Lovells' UPC expertise
Andy Lee and Amy Brooks of Brandsmiths explain how the firm secured a win for Peppa Pig over rival children’s character Wolfoo, in a case that centred on copied audio clips
Pedro Moreira outlines proposals by INPI that look set to open a discussion regarding biological materials, extracts, sequences, genetically edited plants, and computer programs
The combined firm, which has a newly appointed IP partner in London, brings together more than 3,500 practitioners across 52 offices, with flagship hubs in Seattle, London, Sydney and New York
A host of SEP-rich law firms, both leading arguments and as intervenors, are set to feature in the UK Supreme Court’s third FRAND episode, though one ground of appeal has been settled
Gift this article