Austria: Cancellation of trademark licences proves difficult

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

Austria: Cancellation of trademark licences proves difficult

Sponsored by

sonn-400px.png
cancelled-trademark-licences-min-final.jpg

The owner of the trademarks "Miss Austria", "Miss Oberösterreich" (Miss Upper Austria) and further Miss-marks granted a licence to the defendant to use these marks for five years. These trademarks – as one can guess – are registered for an organisation handling beauty contests and the elections of the most beautiful women in an area. The contract contains a clause that allows immediate cancellation of the licence if there is violation by the licensee of any contractual duty. It also prohibits competition by the licensee in this field outside the licence and the use of similar trademarks to those licensed.

The trademark owner and licensor declared two years later the immediate cancellation of the licence for breach of contract and sued for cessation of use of his trademarks by the licensee and defendant in connection with the announcement and promotion of beauty contests. All three instances dismissed the complaint and held the contract in force.

What had the licensee done? He had organised and promoted in Oberösterreich (Upper Austria) a beauty contest under the name "Miss Countess". The licensor was of the opinion that this action violated the prohibition on competitive activities since it lacked an intimate connection with Upper Austria. It also violated the prohibition on use of similar trademarks.

The court did not find this convincing. It found out that the beauty contest "Miss Countess" was an official preliminary contest to the final beauty contest "Miss Oberösterreich" (Miss Upper Austria) and therefore was not an event in competition with "Miss Oberösterreich" and also did not lack an intimate connection with Upper Austria as stated by the plaintiff. With regard to the use of similar trademarks, it was held that here the use of "Miss Countess" as a denomination for the pre-contest was not as a trademark and also the plaintiff from the beginning did not see it as such. Therefore, this point was irrelevant.

This decision shows that in Austria, it is not easy to dissolve a contract which is no longer wanted by one of the parties. Of course, if both parties concur, they can easily rescind the entire contract.

Helmut Sonn

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Tilleke & Gibbins topped the leaderboard with four awards across the region, while Anand & Anand and Kim & Chang emerged as outstanding domestic firms
News of a new addition to Via LA’s Qi wireless charging patent pool, and potential fee increases at the UKIPO were also among the top talking points
The keenly awaited ruling should act as a ‘call to arms’ for a much-needed evolution of UK copyright law, says Rebecca Newman at Addleshaw Goddard
Lawyers at Lavoix provide an overview of the UPC’s approach to inventive step and whether the forum is promoting its own approach rather than following the EPO
Andrew Blattman, who helped IPH gain significant ground in Asia and Canada, will leave in the second half of 2026
The court ordering a complainant to rank its arguments in order of potential success and a win for Edwards Lifesciences were among the top developments in recent weeks
Frederick Lee has rejoined Boies Schiller Flexner, bolstering the firm’s capabilities across AI, media, and entertainment
Nirav Desai and Sasha S Rao at Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox explore how companies’ efforts to manage tariffs by altering corporate structures can undermine their ability to assert their patents and recover damages
Monika Żuraw, founder of Żuraw & Partners, discusses why IP should be part of the foundation of a business, and taking on projects that others walk away from
Lawyers say attention will turn to the UK government’s AI consultation after judgment fails to match pre-trial hype
Gift this article