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

Philippines: Supreme Court addresses the battle of the roasted pig

Sponsored by

hechanova-400px.png
carolina-garcia-tavizon-gli8lcaifpa-unsplash-1.jpg

Editha R Hechanova of Hechanova & Co Inc explores a recent judgment in a two-decade long trademark infringement case between two prominent lechon retailers

No Filipino celebration is complete without the roasted pig or ‘lechon’. Some historians say that the Spaniards possibly introduced it when they came to the Philippines in the 16th century, since the word ‘lechon’ is Spanish for ‘pig’, and the dish resembled its cochinillo asado

In the case of Emzee Foods v Elarfoods (GR No. 220558, February 17 2021), the Supreme Court, affirming the decision of the Court of Appeals found Emzee guilty of infringement and unfair competition, and further awarded Elarfoods damages and ordered Emzee to cease and desist from using the trademarks ‘Elarz Lechon’, ‘Elar Lechon’, ‘Pig Device’ and ‘On A Bamboo Tray’ on its products. 

The contending marks are shown below:

elarfoods

Emzee

According to the Supreme Court, applying the dominancy test, the word ‘Elar’ is the dominant feature of both marks and considering that they were used on the same ‘lechon’ products, the uncanny resemblance of the marks would even lead buyers to believe that Elarfoods and Emzee are the same entity. Moreover, one of Emzee’s incorporators and shareholders was a former trusted employee of Elarfoods, who had previously eagerly promoted the brand ‘Elar Lechon’, and this knowledge subsequently puts Emzee in bad faith and liable for damages. 

Emzee’s defense is that Elarfoods is not the owner of the mark but belongs to the estate of the spouses Lontoc, and that there is no valid assignment to the latter making the goodwill earned over the years as belonging to the said spouses’ estate. For this, the Supreme Court has given scant consideration, considering that a trademark like any incorporeal right may be disposed of not only by way of assignment. 

Besides, at the time the spouses incorporated Elarfoods, the marks were still unregistered and its assignment was perfected by mere consent without the need of a written contract. What is important according to the Supreme Court is that from the time of the incorporation of Elarfoods, it has exclusively used and appropriated the mark as its own. The fact that Elarfoods is the first entity to have registered the said marks in good faith makes it the true owner. 

The interesting question is why, despite the overwhelming evidence of ownership of Elarfoods of its marks, Emzee insists that Elarfoods is not the owner of the mark. It may be that despite finding Emzee liable for infringement and unfair competition neither the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL) nor the Court of Appeals ordered that Emzee cease and desist from using the marks ‘Elarz Lechon’, ‘Elar Lechon’, ‘Pig Device’ and ‘On A Bamboo Tray’, which was a glaring omission noticed by the Supreme Court. 

The absence of this injunction has allowed Emzee to continue and profit from its infringing acts for at least the last 20 years. In this decision the Supreme Court restored the liability of Emzee for exemplary damages and ordered that it cease and desist from using the marks.

 

Editha R Hechanova

President, Hechanova & Co

E: editharh@hechanova.com.ph

 

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Lawyers wish the latest manual had more details on Federal Circuit cases and that training materials for design patent examiners were online
Counsel are eying domestic industry, concurrent PTAB proceedings and heightened scrutiny of cases before institution
Jack Daniel’s has a good chance of winning its dispute over dog toys, but SCOTUS will still want to protect free speech, predict sources
AI users and lawyers discuss why the rulebook for registering AI-generated content may create problems and needs further work
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis coverage from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
A technical effect must still be evident in the original patent filing, the EBoA said in its G2/21 decision today, March 23
Brands should not be deterred from pursuing lookalike producers, and an unfair advantage claim could be the key, say Emma Teichmann and Geoff Steward at Stobbs
Justice Mellor’s highly anticipated ruling surprised SEP owners and reassured implementers that the UK may not be so hostile after all
The England and Wales High Court's judgment comes ahead of a separate hearing concerning one of the patents-in-suit at the EPO
While the rules allow foreign firms to open local offices and offer IP services, a ban on litigation and practising Indian law could mean little will change