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

The Philippines: Confusingly similar corporate names

On August 3 2016, the Supreme Court, in GR 184008 docketed as Indian Chamber of Commerce of the Phils Inc (ICCPI) v Filipino-Indian Chamber of Commerce in the Philippines, Inc (FICCPI), affirming the decisions of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Court of Appeals (CA), ruled that ICCPI is identical and deceptively or confusingly similar to FICCPI, and that the latter has a better right to the FICCPI name.

The facts are as follows. The Filipino-Indian Chamber of Commerce of the Philippines, Inc (defunct FICCPI) was registered with the SEC on November 24 1951. However, it failed to request an extension of its corporate term on November 24 2001, hence its corporate existence expired on that date.

On January 20 2005, Maresh Mansukhani reserved the name FICCPI with the SEC. This was opposed by Ram Sitaldas who claimed to be a member of the defunct FICCPI, on the ground that FICCPI has been in use for a long time by the defunct FICCPI and that, hence, said name reservation by another person who is not its member is illegal. The SEC however, denied Sitaldas's opposition, and the latter appealed to the CA. While this case was pending, the SEC issued the certificate of incorporation to FICCPI.

Both the CA and the Supreme Court affirmed the SEC decision, and held that a corporation is ipso facto dissolved as soon as its term of existence expires. The SEC rules provide that the name of a dissolved corporation cannot be used by other firms for a period of three years, which was complied with by FICCPI when it reserved said name in 2005. The Supreme Court further held that the term "Filipino" is descriptive and cannot be considered as an effective differentiating medium necessary to avoid confusion.


Editha R Hechanova

Hechanova & Co., Inc.Salustiana D. Ty Tower104 Paseo de Roxas AvenueMakati City 1229, PhilippinesTel: (63) 2 812-6561Fax: (63) 2

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Patient groups and generics makers may have to bear the brunt of India’s latest attempt at patent reform
Each week Managing IP speaks to a different IP lawyer about their life and career
Paolo Tavolato, who will share the role, said private equity support would help the IP consultancy achieve its ambitious M&A plans
Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas has hired former Anand & Anand partner Swati Sharma and hopes to compete with specialist IP firms
Rapporteur-Judge András Kupecz ruled that education and training weren’t legitimate reasons for a member of the public to access documents
Searches for comparison prior art will be a little easier, but practitioners will have to put more thought into claim construction and design patent titles
The Helsinki local division rejected AIM Sport’s request for a preliminary injunction in a dispute with rival Supponor
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis coverage from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
The FTC’s plans to scrutinise improperly listed Orange Book patents could make these listings more important in litigation, but firms should be looking at this anyway
Counsel at Debevoise & Plimpton explain how they helped food delivery business Grubhub avoid a preliminary injunction at the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit