<p>Article 15(1) of the Community Trade Mark Regulation states that the Community Trade Mark holder has to put the mark into genuine use in the Community within five years from registration. Even though the regulation does not deal with the extent of use necessary, the Joint Statements uphold that genuine use within one country is enough. However, recent case law from national offices have ruled in the opposite direction, resulting in legal uncertainty concerning how much use that is needed. The courts claimed that use within merely one Member State is not use in a substantial part of the Community and therefore not genuine.This paper shows that it is not satisfactory to define genuine use in the Community by way of analogy to the term substantial part of the territory. The latter derives from the test of reputation concerning a different case entirely. Instead, most indicators point towards a market-oriented approach where national frontiers do not matter. Focus should be on the extent of use being made compared to the market concerned in the entire EU. A case-by-case assessment is required, where all relevant circumstances are taken into consideration.</p>

Article 15(1) of the Community Trade Mark Regulation states that the Community Trade Mark holder has to put the mark into genuine use in the Community within five years from registration. Even though the regulation does not deal with the extent of use necessary, the Joint Statements uphold that genuine use within one country is enough. However, recent case law from national offices have ruled in the opposite direction, resulting in legal uncertainty concerning how much use that is needed. The courts claimed that use within merely one Member State is not use in a substantial part of the Community and therefore not genuine.This paper shows that it is not satisfactory to define genuine use in the Community by way of analogy to the term substantial part of the territory. The latter derives from the test of reputation concerning a different case entirely. Instead, most indicators point towards a market-oriented approach where national frontiers do not matter. Focus should be on the extent of use being made compared to the market concerned in the entire EU. A case-by-case assessment is required, where all relevant circumstances are taken into consideration.

Pursuant to the European legislation it is required to use a registered trade mark genuinely. However, it does not directly follow from that legislation what exactly does the term “genuine use” represents. Finding of the proper meaning of the concept of genuine use requires profound analysis of the case-law of the CJEU which has made many comments to this issue in dozens of its decisions. Since these decisions usually deal with different specific questions relating to the concept of genuine use, the relevant case-law seems fragmented. However, putting these decisions together, it is possible to get fairly clear idea about the concept and what it requires. Therefore, this thesis provides its reader with a complex description and analysis of the concept of genuine use within the EU and its interpretation as presented by the CJEU. Besides, the thesis clarifies certain procedural aspects connected with the concept of genuine use, namely these related to proving of genuineness of a use of a trade mark and also these related to utilization of the concept of genuine use in various trade mark proceedings. Finally, the thesis analyses the relationship between the concept of genuine use and trade mark licenses.

Šio magistro baigiamojo darbo objektas - prekių ženklo naudojimo reikalavimo problematika. Magistro baigiamajame darbe yra nagrinėjami tarptautiniai, Europos Sąjungos bei nacionaliniai teisės aktai, reglamentuojantys prekių ženklo naudojimo reikalavimą, analizuojama aktuali Europos Bendrijų Teisingumo Teismo, Europos Bendrijų pirmosios instancijos teismo bei Vidaus rinkos harmonizavimo tarnybos (prekių ženklams ir dizainui) praktika. Šio darbo tikslas yra išnagrinėti probleminius prekių ženklo naudojimo reikalavimo teorinius bei praktinius aspektus ir pateikti galimus šių problemų sprendimo variantus. Magistro baigiamajame darbe aptariama prekių ženklo naudojimo reikalavimo samprata, tikslai bei taikymo ypatumai. Pagrindinis dėmesys šiame darbe skiriamas prekių ženklo naudojimui keliamų reikalavimų teisinio reglamentavimo bei taikymo teisminių ir kvaziteisminių institucijų praktikoje analizei. Konkrečiai, magistro baigiamajame darbe nagrinėjamas prekių ženklo naudojimo iš tikrųjų reikalavimas, analizuojami prekių ženklo naudojimo subjektams, būdui, laikotarpiui, vietai ir apimčiai keliami reikalavimai. Paskutinėje darbo dalyje apžvelgiamos aplinkybės, pateisinančios prekių ženklo nenaudojimą. Šiame magistro baigiamajame darbe keliama hipotezė, jog pagrindinę prekių ženklo naudojimo reikalavimo problematiką sukelia ne teisinio reguliavimo netobulumas, o prekių ženklo naudojimui keliamų reikalavimų aiškinimas bei taikymas praktikoje. / The subject matter of this thesis is the problematic of obligation to use the trademark. This thesis provides with the study of international, European Union and Lithuanian national law related to obligation to use the trademark as well as analysis of the relevant case-law of European Court of Justice, Court of First Instance and the Office of Harmonization for the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs). This work aims to analyze the problematic theoretical and practical aspects of obligation to use the trademark as well as to suggest possible solutions to the problem. This thesis gives an overview of the concept of obligation to use the trademark, its purposes and peculiarities of application. The main emphasis of this work is on analysis of regulation of requirements imposed on trademark use as well as their application in the case-law of judicial and quasi-judicial institutions. In particular, this thesis provides analysis of the genuine trademark use requirement as well as requirements for the subjects, nature, place, time and extent of the trademark use. The last part of the work deals with the circumstances which justify non-use of the trademark. This thesis raises the hypothesis that the main problematic of obligation to use the trademark is caused by practical interpretation and application of requirements for trademark use rather than by imperfection of legal regulation.

No description available.