INTA 2019: International judges discuss bad faith rules and developments
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 2023

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

INTA 2019: International judges discuss bad faith rules and developments


Judges from Germany, Canada, China, the EU and the Andean Community discussed their stances on bad faith marks at INTA’s Annual Meeting in Boston


Bad faith applications were a hot topic for a panel of international judges yesterday. Inspired by efforts to harmonise trademark laws and the tremendous rise in trademark registrations by Chinese applicants – both in China and abroad – many countries are updating their trademark laws to specifically address bad faith filings. There are over 18 million registered marks in China, about 6,500 of which have been filed via the Madrid System.

In Germany, former federal patent court judge Marianne Grabrucker said that witnesses are accepted in cases where a bad faith argument is being made. “Normally we don’t have witnesses in trademark cases,” she said. However, “it’s very difficult to get a positive decision on bad faith in Germany,” so witnesses can be necessary to provide proof to meet the high standard.

For countries within the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the Andean Community – Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Chile, and Bolivia – judge Hugo Gómez Apac said that “we accept every form of proof regarding bad faith trademarks,” including contracts, testimony, and witnesses.

In Canada, bad faith will be a new ground for opposition once amendments to the Trademarks Act come into effect on June 17. Managing IP covered the amendments and their implications here. Unfortunately, no one knows how the term “bad faith” will be interpreted. Even Michael Manson, judge at Canada’s Federal Court, said: “We’ll see what happens.” On an encouraging note, he did assure attorneys that “bad faith marks will be thrown out before they get to the courts”. That is, CIPO will have a process to shut them down once they have been identified.

Andrej Stec, judge at the EU General Court, has a straightforward definition: “When there is bad faith, you simply see it. If you’re not sure, it’s not bad faith.” He added that applying for a mark that is technically available but used to be well-known in the '70s, for example, “could be considered as bad faith because there is still some goodwill attached to it”.

Bad faith in China

In China, bad faith trademark registrations are one of the top complaints from foreign brands. Managing IP covered the phenomenon here. In response to these concerns, China approved amendments to its Trademark Law on April 23, 2019 that specifically aim to address the issue. The amendments will take effect on November 1 this year.

Some important changes under China’s updated law include a new use requirement, increased punitive damages available in civil counterfeiting cases, and perhaps most importantly, punitive measures for bad faith actors – including applicants and trademark agents themselves.

Yuanming Qin, IPR judge at the Supreme People’s Court in China, acknowledged that China’s first-to-file system “can cause bad faith issues”. The amendments “will create a level playing field by forbidding the abuse of rights,” he said.

Among other changes, "malicious acquisition" and stockpiling of registrations will be seen as IP abuses. Qin assured the lawyers in attendance that “trademark rights are protected in China, no matter whether it’s foreigners or natives”. He pointed to the Qiaodan case as an example of successful enforcement by a foreign entity. Managing IP covered the case here.

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Each week Managing IP speaks to a different IP practitioner about their life and career
Mathys & Squire has filed a test case that the firm hopes will make UPC pleadings available by default
Multiple representatives and their teams can now work on cases using the online CMS, but not everyone can submit documents
James Lawrence, partner at Addisons, explains how he convinced the full Federal Court of Australia to back his client in a patent dispute concerning mining safety equipment
The deal will allow the companies to use each other’s patents covering 4G and 5G technologies, and other cellular SEPs
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis coverage from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Three lead IP counsel in the US, the UK and China share how they walk the fine line between building in-house competence and splurging on external lawyers
Mike Renaud, head of the IP division at Mintz, explains his business strategy and how the firm justifies charging higher rates
Sources say firms must build relationships with clients that transcend their connections to individual partners
INTA’s resolution on online marketplaces and appointment of Amazon’s general counsel follow calls for the association to take a direct position on internet fakes