Chang Tsi & Partners'cases
Cancellation in dispute against the Trademark "GIORGIO ARMANI in Chinese Characters"
In April 2011, Chang Tsi & Partners obtained the cancellation from the Beijing High Court in a dispute against the Trademark "GIORGIO ARMANI in Chinese Characters" under the name of a Chinese trading company in class 3.
When Giorgio Armani's brand started to distribute in China through a well-established cosmetics group, it discovered that a local company already registered the name in Chinese under the same class. This conflict between Giorgio Armani and the Chinese Trading Company regarding the disputed Trademark in Chinese Characters started in early 2000, at this time the Italian fashion brand did not have enough evidence to prove it was a well-known trademark in China.
In our petition to TRAB (China's Trademark Review Adjudication Board), we argued that the registration of the disputed mark infringed upon the prior name rights of Mr. Giorgio Armani according to Article 31 of the Chinese Trademark Law.
In its review decision, the TRAB confirmed our arguments and therefore its decision showed and recognized that Mr. Giorgio Armani, as a fashion designer had acquired a high reputation in the designated industry prior to the application date of the disputed mark and its Chinese translation name "阿玛尼" is well known to the Chinese public. After cancellation of the disputed mark, the Chinese Trading Company appealed to the Beijing Intermediary Court to be defeated by the TRAB. The company again appealed to the Beijing High Court .which gave a final and effective decision in favor of Giorgio Armani.
This case is a major success for our company because of the communication we established with the Court, especially during the final months before the end of proceedings, to persuade them to reach a positive decision. And because our arguments and our expertise were recognized by the three jurisdictions: the TRAB, the Beijing Intermediate Court and the Beijing High Court.
Strategies for Patentee in Administrative Lawsuit against Design Patent Invalidation Decision