|
ASSOCIATE PARTNERS ATTEND 18TH ANNUAL COMMONWEALTH LAW CONFERENCE |
|
Two of our Associate Partners, Miss. Daisy Zinyemba and Mr. Regis Chawatama, recently attended the 18th Annual Commonwealth Law Conference. The Conference was held in Cape Town, South Africa from 14 to 18 April 2013.
The Commonwealth Law Conference is one of the most prestigious events on the international legal calendar providing an opportunity for judges, legal academics and practising lawyers from across the Commonwealth to meet and discuss current and topical issues which affect the legal and broader community today. The theme of this year's conference was: Common Challenges - Common Solutions, Commonwealth, Commerce Ubuntu and this year, the Conference highlighted the legal, socio-economic and commercial challenges faced by the legal profession in Commonwealth jurisdictions and provided an opportunity for legal professionals to exchange information and learn from this.
Key note speakers at the conference included: Navathen Pillay, the United Nations Human Commissioner for Human Rights; the Rt Hon The Lord Judge, Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales (the Head of the Judiciary and President of the Courts of England and Wales) and Justice Kate O'Regan, a former Judge of the Constitutional Court of South Africa.
Alongside the key note speakers, more than 175 local and international speakers shared their practices and views in 48 topical and thought provoking sessions that were divided into four main streams which ran concurrently namely;
Corporate and Commercial Law; Legal and Judicial Professionalism; Constitutionalism, Human Rights and the Rule of Law and lastly, Contemporary Legal Topics.
Our Miss. Zinyemba and Mr. Chawatama attended the Corporate and Commercial Law sessions and of interest to them was the session presented by the Attorney General of the British Virgin Islands (Jamaica), Dr. Christopher Malcolm on Special Commercial Courts in the British Virgin Islands. |
|
|
PROTECTING THE TRADEMARK WORLD: PART 2 - ADVANTAGES OF THE MADRID SYSTEM |
|
In Part 1 of this 4 part series, we introduced the Madrid System as a procedural mechanism that offers a trademark owner the possibility of trademark protection in several countries by filing a single application directly in the national or regional trademark office.
In Part 2 of this ongoing series, we shall discuss the advantages of this system as well as the considerations that must be borne in mind by trademark owners who are considering taking advantage of the system.
Why the Madrid system?
The Madrid system greatly simplifies the subsequent management of the mark as it is possible to record subsequent changes or to renew the registration through a single procedural step and further countries may be subsequently designated by the Applicant.
Further advantages of the Madrid system include:
-
Protection of a trademark can be achieved in a number of countries by an individual simply filing one application directly in their local or regional trademark office;
-
In the best case scenario, an individual can file an application in as many as 63 of the member countries or territories. In 10 years time when it is time to file a renewal request to extend the registration for an additional 10 year term, an individual will by pay a single renewal fee to WIPO;
-
In the event that an individual decides to assign their rights to the mark, that individual can record a single assignment of the trade mark rights at WIPO covering those countries for which the rights have been transferred instead of filing an application on a country by country basis;
-
The system provides a mechanism by which a legal bridge can be created between the national and global market, which would not have been otherwise possible;
-
The stringent time limit for review by national Trademark Offices may significantly accelerate registration in countries where the review process normally takes several years; and
-
The centralized nature of the international filing system promise considerable benefits in convenience and cost over the filing of separate national applications. For example, an Applicant need not engage local counsel unless an Office Action is issued by that country’s international Trademark Office.
Notwithstanding the fact that the treaty does achieve the international protection of a trademark without having to register a trademark in the separate countries of interest, there are some considerations that need to be highlighted with regards to the accession of any country to the treaty.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
PROTECTING THE TRADEMARK WORLD: AN INTRODUCTION TO THE MADRID SYSTEM |
|
The Madrid system is applicable in the registration of international trade marks and was established in 1891. The system functions under the Madrid International Agreement of 1891 and the Madrid Protocol of 1989. The Protocol is administered by the International Bureau of World Intellectual Property Office, (WIPO) located in Geneva, Switzerland, which after verifying compliance with the basic filing requirements, publishes the application in the International Gazette. Copies of the application are then sent to the Trade mark offices in the countries designated by the Applicant which have up to 18 months to approve or refuse the application based on national standards of registrability, including possible third party rights.
To date, 87 countries have acceded to the treaty and of this figure, 10 countries are located on the African continent with the most notable exclusion being that of South Africa, which is not yet a contracting party to the Protocol. The reason why South Africa is not yet a contracting party is because the South African local trademark office does not currently meet the deadlines or turnaround times prescribed by the international system. It is hoped that if the Registry reduces its backlog and complies with international standards, it will join the protocol within the next five (5) years or so.
WHY THE MADRID SYSTEM?
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
