PHILIPPINES Law and Practice Contributed by: Katrina Doble, Danielle Francesca San Pedro, Edward King Chua and Maria Patricia Cruz, Villaraza & Angangco
the filing date for the divisional applications will remain the same as the original. In cases where a multi-class application is based on a foreign application or registration, the applicant may divide the application into two parts – one covering goods/services eligible for convention priority and another covering the remaining goods/services. Only the divisional application related to the foreign regis - tration can retain the convention priority. 4.9 Incorrect Information in an Application The amendment of incorrect information is within the jurisdiction of the trade mark examiner. If the examiner identifies reasonable grounds to question the accura - cy of any part of the application, they may request that the applicant submits supporting evidence to clarify the issue. If a mistake occurs in the registration due to the applicant’s fault made in good faith, the IPOPHL can issue a certificate of correction upon payment of the necessary fee. However, such a correction cannot involve any changes that would require the mark to be republished. 4.10 Refusal of Registration A trade mark cannot be registered if it falls under any of the following absolute grounds for refusal: • immoral, deceptive or scandalous matter, or mat - ter that disparages or falsely suggests a connec - tion with persons, institutions, beliefs or national symbols; • the flag, coat of arms or insignia of the Philippines or any foreign nation, or simulations thereof; • a name, portrait or signature identifying a living individual, or the name, signature or portrait of a deceased Philippine President during the life of his widow; • generic signs; • signs customary or usual in everyday language or established trade practice; • signs indicating the kind, quality, quantity or geo - graphical origin of the goods/services; • shapes dictated by technical factors or the nature
• signs contrary to public order or morality. The examiner must state the grounds for objections in the Registrability Report, and the applicant has two months from its mailing date to respond. If the refusal is upheld, the applicant can file a notice of appeal to the Director of Trademarks. A decision of the Director can then be appealed to the ODG. 4.11 The Madrid System The Philippines adheres to the Madrid Protocol, which permits the holder of an international trade mark reg - istration to designate another country for trade mark protection. To file an international application, the applicant must electronically submit the following via efiling.madrid. wipo.int: • the name, address and contact details of the applicant or the address and contact details of the applicant’s representative, if any; • the designated contracting parties; • reproduction of the mark; and • an indication of the goods and services for which registration of the mark is sought. Filing through the Madrid System offers several ben - efits. A single application in one language with one fee can cover multiple territories, eliminating the need for multiple national applications, translations or local representatives. It also streamlines trade mark man - agement and expansion, and provides global protec - tion in more than 80% of the world. 5. Trade Mark Procedure for Inter Partes Proceedings 5.1 Timeframes for Filing an Opposition or Cancellation Trade Mark Opposition Once an application is allowed, it is published in the IPOPHL e-Gazette, and an opposition can be filed against it within 30 days from its publication date. This deadline can be extended once, for 45 days, through a proper motion with payment of the extension and opposition fees.
of the goods; • colour alone;
• signs likely to mislead the public regarding the nature, quality or origin of the goods/services; or
395 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook