涉港澳台案例汇编 | 法宝双语案例
本期双语案例推送鳄鱼恤有限公司诉国家工商行政管理总局商标评审委员会公司商标异议复审行政纠纷案等涉港澳台案例。
目录
Contents
1.鳄鱼恤有限公司诉国家工商行政管理总局商标评审委员会公司商标异议复审行政纠纷案 Crocodile Shirt Co., Ltd. v. Trademark Review and Adjudication Board of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce (case regarding administrative dispute over review of trademark opposition) 2. 王老吉有限公司与国家工商行政管理总局商标评审委员会商标申请驳回复审行政纠纷上诉案 Wanglaoji Co., Ltd. v. Trademark Review and Adjudication Board of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce (appeal of case regarding administrative dispute over trademark rejection review) 3.吉林环城农村商业银行股份有限公司等与恒丰银行股份有限公司合同纠纷上诉案 Jilin Huancheng Rural Commercial Bank Co., Ltd. et al. v. Hengfeng Bank Co., Ltd. (appeal of case regarding contract dispute)
一、鳄鱼恤有限公司诉国家工商行政管理总局商标评审委员会公司商标异议复审行政纠纷案
【裁判要旨】
在商标注册时，申请人申请注册的商标与他人在同种或类似商品上已经注册或初步审定的商标相同或近似时，为保护商标所有人的合法权益，应当驳回该商标注册申请。商标近似，是指商标的外形特征或整体结构相同或相似，会使消费者产生误认。在判定商标是否构成近似时，应当综合判断商标的相似程度和相关商标的知名度、商品的关联程度等。
[Judgment Abstract]
At the time of trademark registration, if a trademark being applied for by an applicant is the same as or similar to a trademark of others that has been registered or preliminarily reviewed for the same or similar goods, the trademark registration application shall be rejected in order to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the trademark owner. Approximation of trademarks means that the appearance features or overall structures of trademarks are the same or similar, which may confuse consumers. Therefore, the similarity of trademarks, the popularity of the relevant trademark and the relevance of the goods shall all be taken into comprehensive consideration in order to determine whether or not the trademark constitutes an approximation.
【法宝引证码】CLI.C.10941557
[CLI Code] CLI.C.10941557(EN)
二、王老吉有限公司与国家工商行政管理总局商标评审委员会商标申请驳回复审行政纠纷上诉案
Wanglaoji Co., Ltd. v. Trademark Review and Adjudication Board of the State Administration for Industry and Commerce (appeal of case regarding administrative dispute over trademark rejection review)
【裁判摘要】
直接表示商品的质量、主要原料、功能、用途、重量、数量及其他特点的标志不得作为商标注册，除非有证据证明该标志经过使用取得了显著性并起到了识别商品来源的作用。由文字“怕上火喝”构成的标志，指定使用在“饮料制剂”等商品上，其含义简单、明确，直接表示了产品具有降火的功能和用途，缺乏注册商标对显著性的要求。另外，当事人提交的证据亦不能证明该标志经过使用取得了显著性。所以，“怕上火喝”因不具有显著性而不得作为商标注册。
[Judgment Abstract]
Labelling with direct indications of the quality, main raw materials, functions, uses, weight, quantity, and other features of goods should not be registered as trademarks, unless there is evidence that such labels are distinctive and have played a role in the identification of goods. A label bearing the words “Pa Shang Huo He” is designated to be used on goods such as beverages. With simple and definite meaning, this label directly reflects that the product is intended to have a cooling effect, falling short of the requirements for distinctiveness of a trademark to be registered. In addition, the applicant is unable to provide evidence to prove that this label has been distinctive. Therefore, the words “Pa Shang Huo He” should not be registered as a trademark, due to lack of distinctiveness.
【法宝引证码】CLI.C.9657590
[CLI Code] CLI.C.9657590(EN)
三、吉林环城农村商业银行股份有限公司等与恒丰银行股份有限公司合同纠纷上诉案
Jilin Huancheng Rural Commercial Bank Co., Ltd. et al. v. Hengfeng Bank Co., Ltd. (appeal of case regarding contract dispute)
【裁判要旨】
银行分支机构具备诉讼主体资格，能够以自己的名义起诉或应诉，独立行使诉讼权利、履行诉讼义务。银行分支机构的民事责任依法应由银行法人承担，并不存在承担连带责任的法律依据。具体而言，如银行分支机构管理的财产较为充足的，可以由其单独承担责任，如财产不足的，可以在银行法人分支机构承担责任的同时，由法人对其分支机构的责任承担补充责任。因此，银行分支机构签订合同，相对人将银行及分支机构同时起诉的，如并无证据证明银行分支机构管理的财产不足以承担其民事责任的，则应当驳回对银行法人的诉讼请求。在执行中银行分支机构不能履行法律文书确定的义务的，可裁定执行银行的财产。
[Judgment Abstract]
A bank branch has the standing of litigation subject, which allows it to answer or file suits in its own name, and independently exercise litigation rights and perform litigation obligations. The banking corporation should assume the civil liability of its branches according to law, and there has been no legal basis for joint and several liability. To be specific, if a branch has sufficient property under its management, it may independently assume the liability. Otherwise, the banking corporation should bear supplementary liability for its branches. Therefore, where a branch of a bank has signed a contract and a counterparty simultaneously brings a lawsuit against the bank and the branch, and there is no evidence that the property managed by the branch is insufficient to bear its civil liability, the claim against the banking corporation should be dismissed. If a branch of a bank fails to perform its obligations as defined in legal instruments during the execution, a court may rule on executing the bank's property.
【法宝引证码】CLI.C.10889509
[CLI Code] CLI.C.10889509(EN)
北京北大英华
科技有限公司
PKULaw
Chinalawinfo
PKULaw
Chinalawinfo
PKULaw
Chinalawinfo
-END-
银行卡纠纷案例汇编 | 法宝双语案例
最高人民法院公报案例汇编 | 法宝双语案例
最高人民法院公报案例汇编 | 法宝双语案例
无因管理类型案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
质押合同类型案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
知识产权类型案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
租赁合同类型案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
技术合同类型案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
票据类型案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例商业秘密类型案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
涉港澳台案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例证券案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
涉外商事案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
物权案例汇编 | 法宝双语案例最高院公报案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
涉垄断类案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
点击相应图片识别二维码
获取更多信息
北大法宝
北大法律信息网
法宝学堂
法宝智能