Ond tro inom varumärkesrätten - En studie av definitionen av det varumärkesrättsliga begreppet ond tro inom unionsrätten och den svenska införlivningen
(2022) JURM02 20221Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Begreppet ond tro inom varumärkesrätten återfinns både i svensk nationell rätt och inom unionsrätten. I dagligt tal förstås ond tro som att någon agerar med en ond eller ohederlig inställning eller avsikt men inom varumärkesrätten innehar det en bredare betydelse. I varumärkesrättsliga sammanhang återfinns ond tro både som ett registreringshinder och som ogiltighetsgrund för upphävande av ett redan registrerat varumärke. Begreppet saknar definition i lagtexten, varför det har kommit att utformas genom praxis, en utveckling som är ständigt pågående. Det första avgörandet i vilket EU-domstolen kom att uttala sig om tolkningen av begreppet kom 2009 och därefter har efterföljande avgöranden kommit att vidareutveckla begreppets betydelse.... (More)
- Begreppet ond tro inom varumärkesrätten återfinns både i svensk nationell rätt och inom unionsrätten. I dagligt tal förstås ond tro som att någon agerar med en ond eller ohederlig inställning eller avsikt men inom varumärkesrätten innehar det en bredare betydelse. I varumärkesrättsliga sammanhang återfinns ond tro både som ett registreringshinder och som ogiltighetsgrund för upphävande av ett redan registrerat varumärke. Begreppet saknar definition i lagtexten, varför det har kommit att utformas genom praxis, en utveckling som är ständigt pågående. Det första avgörandet i vilket EU-domstolen kom att uttala sig om tolkningen av begreppet kom 2009 och därefter har efterföljande avgöranden kommit att vidareutveckla begreppets betydelse. Utifrån dessa kan vissa teman utläsas, dels kan fallen av ond tro delas in i sju olika typer där olika faktorer och omständigheter framstår som mer eller mindre relevanta för bedömningen vilka denna uppsats belyser och systematiserar. Faktorer som sökandens avsikt med ansökan om registrering och kännedom om ett tidigare förväxlingsbart varumärke utgör faktorer som tillmäts stor vikt i bedömningen. Omständigheter som de affärsmässiga överväganden som föranlett ansökan utgör likaså en viktig del i bedömningen av om en ansökan lämnats in i ond tro.
På senare år har särskilt två avgöranden kommit att förändra synen på hur begreppet ska tolkas. Efter dessa stod det klart att den svenska rätten inte längre speglade sin unionsrättsliga föregångare, varför en ändring av den svenska varumärkeslagen var nödvändig. I bedömningen av om ändringarna av de svenska ond tros-bestämmelserna, särskilt 2 kap. 7 § andra stycket varumärkeslag (2010:1877), är förenliga med dess unionsrättsliga föregångare landar uppsatsen i slutsatsen att det inte, utifrån dess ordalydelse finns något i den svenska varumärkeslagen som strider mot gällande unionsrätt. Av den praxis som finns att tillgå verkar det som att det finns utrymme att tillämpa de svenska bestämmelserna i enlighet med hur EU-domstolen och tribunalen uttalat att de ska tolkas. (Less) - Abstract
- The concept of bad faith in trademark law is found both in Swedish national law and in Union law. In everyday speech, bad faith is understood as someone acting with an evil or dishonest attitude or intention, but in trademark law it has a broader meaning. In the context of trademark law, bad faith is found both as a ground for refusal and as a ground for invalidity of an already registered trademark. The concept is not defined within the legal text, which is why it has been formulated through case law, a development that is constantly ongoing. The first decision in which the European Court of Justice came to rule on the interpretation of the term was published in 2009 and since then, subsequent decisions have come to further develop the... (More)
- The concept of bad faith in trademark law is found both in Swedish national law and in Union law. In everyday speech, bad faith is understood as someone acting with an evil or dishonest attitude or intention, but in trademark law it has a broader meaning. In the context of trademark law, bad faith is found both as a ground for refusal and as a ground for invalidity of an already registered trademark. The concept is not defined within the legal text, which is why it has been formulated through case law, a development that is constantly ongoing. The first decision in which the European Court of Justice came to rule on the interpretation of the term was published in 2009 and since then, subsequent decisions have come to further develop the meaning of the term. Based on these, certain themes can be found, and cases of bad faith can be divided into seven different types where different factors and circumstances appear to be more or less important for the assessment which the essay illustrate and systematize. Factors such as the applicant's intention with the application of registration and knowledge of a previous confusingly similar trademark are factors that are of great importance in the assessment. Circumstances such as business considerations that gave rise to the application also form an important part of the assessment of an application submitted in bad faith.
In recent years, two decisions have changed the view of how the concept should be interpreted. After these, it became clear that Swedish law no longer reflected its predecessor under EU law, which is why an amendment to the Swedish Trademark Act was necessary. In the comparison of whether the change of the Swedish provisions on bad faith, especially 2 chapter § 7 second paragraph of the Trademark Act (2010: 1877), are compatible with its predecessors under Union law, the thesis lands in the conclusion that, based on its wording, there is nothing in the Swedish Trademark Act that is contrary to Union law. From the available case law, it seems that there is room to apply the Swedish provisions in accordance with how the European Court of Justice and the General Court state that the concept of bad faith should be interpreted. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9080633
- author
- Johannesson, Alice LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- Bad Faith Within Trade Mark Law - A Study of the Definition of the Concept of Bad Faith Within EU Trade Mark Law and the Swedish Interpretation
- course
- JURM02 20221
- year
- 2022
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- EU-rätt, EU law, immaterialrätt, varumärkesrätt, ond tro
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9080633
- date added to LUP
- 2022-06-15 08:39:58
- date last changed
- 2022-06-15 08:39:58
@misc{9080633,
abstract = {{The concept of bad faith in trademark law is found both in Swedish national law and in Union law. In everyday speech, bad faith is understood as someone acting with an evil or dishonest attitude or intention, but in trademark law it has a broader meaning. In the context of trademark law, bad faith is found both as a ground for refusal and as a ground for invalidity of an already registered trademark. The concept is not defined within the legal text, which is why it has been formulated through case law, a development that is constantly ongoing. The first decision in which the European Court of Justice came to rule on the interpretation of the term was published in 2009 and since then, subsequent decisions have come to further develop the meaning of the term. Based on these, certain themes can be found, and cases of bad faith can be divided into seven different types where different factors and circumstances appear to be more or less important for the assessment which the essay illustrate and systematize. Factors such as the applicant's intention with the application of registration and knowledge of a previous confusingly similar trademark are factors that are of great importance in the assessment. Circumstances such as business considerations that gave rise to the application also form an important part of the assessment of an application submitted in bad faith.
In recent years, two decisions have changed the view of how the concept should be interpreted. After these, it became clear that Swedish law no longer reflected its predecessor under EU law, which is why an amendment to the Swedish Trademark Act was necessary. In the comparison of whether the change of the Swedish provisions on bad faith, especially 2 chapter § 7 second paragraph of the Trademark Act (2010: 1877), are compatible with its predecessors under Union law, the thesis lands in the conclusion that, based on its wording, there is nothing in the Swedish Trademark Act that is contrary to Union law. From the available case law, it seems that there is room to apply the Swedish provisions in accordance with how the European Court of Justice and the General Court state that the concept of bad faith should be interpreted.}},
author = {{Johannesson, Alice}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Ond tro inom varumärkesrätten - En studie av definitionen av det varumärkesrättsliga begreppet ond tro inom unionsrätten och den svenska införlivningen}},
year = {{2022}},
}