Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 8 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

France: The French implementation of the EU trademarks directive


Order No 2019-1169 of November 13 2019 relating to trademarks incorporates Directive (EU) 2015/2436 of December 16 2015 and was published on November 14 2019.

It entered into force on December 11, with the exception of the provisions relating to invalidity and revocation procedures (these will enter into force on April 2020).

As a result of this new law, the requirement of graphic representation is no longer necessary. The absolute grounds for refusal now encompass appellations of origin, geographical indications, traditional terms for wine and traditional specialties, and earlier plant variety denominations. The provisions relating to collective trademarks have also been amended. Only applications filed from the entry into force of the order are affected.

The opposition procedure is now available for prior rights, including company names, commercial names and domain names, reputed trademarks, names, images of a public entity and trademarks filed in their own name by an agent or representative. Several earlier rights may be invoked. When applicable, proof must be provided for the five year period preceding the application date of the opposed trademark for the goods or services which serve as the basis of the opposition.

Procedural rules are also amended. These new rules concern trademark applications filed as of December 11 2019.

The FPTO will have now exclusive jurisdiction regarding actions based on absolute grounds or invalidity for non-use. The office will share jurisdiction with courts regarding actions based on relative grounds. The courts remain competent when there is a connected issue of unfair competition and in relation to infringement actions, investigative, interim or provisional measures. The action before the FPTO could be based on several grounds and/or rights.

This action will be inadmissible if, upon the request of the defendant, the opposing party cannot prove that his trademark was in use during the five year period preceding the action. He needs to prove that his trademark was used during the five year period preceding the application date of the later trademark and his trademark was registered for more than five years before this application date.

There is no limitation period attached to the invalidity action except for well-known trademarks. However, tolerance of use of the later registration for five years will make the action inadmissible.

The infringement action is extended to the offer, the placing on the market or the notable possession of packaging, labels, marks or any other support on which the trademark is attached and to merchandise in transit. The limitation period for infringement actions will now be five years from the day the right holder knew or should have known the last fact enabling him to exercise his right.

New official fees are also applicable from December 11.

Aurélia Marie

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

The IPO must change its approach and communicate with IP owners about its attempts at clearing up the trademark register
Counsel are looking at enforceability, business needs and cost savings when filing for patents overseas
James Perkins, member at Cole Schotz in Texas, reveals how smaller tech companies can protect themselves when dealing with larger players
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 EUIPO management board must provide the Council of the EU with a performance assessment before it can remove the executive director
The European Commission confirmed that plans for a unitary SPC will be published in April alongside reforms to the SEP system
The court held that SEP implementers could be injuncted or directed to pay royalties before trial if they are deemed to be unwilling licensees
Patentees should feel cautious optimism over the EPO Enlarged Board of Appeal’s decision in G2/21, say European patent attorneys
Significant changes to the standard of law are unlikely, say sources, who note that some justices seemed sceptical that the parties disagreed on the legal standard
Sources say the High Court of Australia’s ruling that reputation is immaterial in trademark infringement cases could stop famous brands from muscling out smaller players