Week 11 Case 29 G.R. No. 194062 Flashcards

1
Q

Did the Petitioners commit trademark infringement and unfair competition? How?

A

Yes. Petitioners have actually committed trademark infringement when
they refilled, without the respondents’ consent, the LPG containers bearing the
registered marks of the respondents. As noted by respondents, petitioners’ acts
will inevitably confuse the consuming public, since they have no way of knowing that the gas contained in the LPG tanks bearing respondents’ marks is
in reality not the latter’s LPG product after the same had been illegally refilled. The public will then be led to believe that petitioners are authorized refillers and distributors of respondents’ LPG products, considering that they are
accepting empty containers of respondents and refilling them for resale.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What is the jurisprudential definition of unfair competition?

A

Unfair competition has been defined as the passing
off (or palming off) or attempting to pass off upon the public of the goods or
business of one person as the goods or business of another with the end and probable effect of deceiving the public.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

How does palming off take place?

A

Passing off (or palming off) takes place where the defendant, by imitative devices on the general appearance of the goods, misleads prospective
purchasers into buying his merchandise under the impression that they are
buying that of his competitors. Thus, the defendant gives his goods the general
appearance of the goods of his competitor with the intention of deceiving the public that the goods are those of his competitor.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

How did palming off take place in this instant case?

A

In the present case, respondents pertinently observed that by refilling and selling LPG cylinders bearing their registered marks, petitioners are selling
goods by giving them the general appearance of goods of another manufacturer.

What’s more, the CA correctly pointed out that there is a showing that the
consumers may be misled into believing that the LPGs contained in the cylinders bearing the marks “GASUL” and “SHELLANE” are those goods or
products of the petitioners when, in fact, they are not. Obviously, the mere use
of those LPG cylinders bearing the trademarks “GASUL” and “SHELLANE” will give the LPGs sold by REGASCO the general appearance of the products of the petitioners.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly