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 2025

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

Attorneys explain why there are early signs that the US Supreme Court could rule in favour of ISP Cox in a copyright dispute
A swathe of UPC-related hires suggests firms are taking the forum seriously, as questions over the transitional stage begin
A win for Nintendo in China and King & Spalding hiring a prominent patent litigator were also among the top talking points
Rebecca Newman at Addleshaw Goddard, who live-reported on the seminal dispute, unpicks the trials and tribulations of the case and considers its impact
Attorneys predict how Lululemon’s trade dress and design patent suit against Costco could play out
Lawyers at Linklaters analyse some of the key UPC trends so far, and look ahead to life beyond the transition period
David Rodrigues, who previously worked at an IP boutique, said he may become more involved in transactional work at his new firm
Indian smartphone maker Lava must pay $2.3 million as a security deposit for past sales, as its dispute with Dolby over audio coding SEPs plays out
Powell Gilbert’s opening in Düsseldorf, complete with a new partner hire, continues this summer’s trend of UPC-related lateral movement
IP leaders at Brandsmiths and Bird & Bird, who were on opposing sides at the UK Supreme Court in Iconix v Dream Pairs, unpick the landmark case and its ramifications
Gift this article