Lacoste loses ‘battle of crocs’

Lacoste loses ‘battle of crocs’

/ 05:15 AM September 16, 2024

SC junks oil firms’ bid vs gov’t order to detail their pricing

Inquirer file photo

MANILA, Philippines — A long-running dispute between two clothing brands with logos that each depict a crocodile has ended in favor of Crocodile International Pte. Ltd. of Singapore over Lacoste S.A. of France.

The two companies have locked horns in legal battles around the world over Lacoste’s claim that its rival’s brand design resembled its own too closely.

Article continues after this advertisement

READ: Dali grocery chain ordered to stop sale of suspected rip off products

FEATURED STORIES

But the Supreme Court ruled that there was no confusing similarity between the two trademarks, affirming an earlier decision by the Court of Appeals (CA).

READ: PH is benchmark for Lacoste’s Southeast Asia market

Article continues after this advertisement

Distinguishable

In a 16-page ruling on GR No. 223270, the Supreme Court’s Third Division rejected Lacoste’s petition seeking to overturn a 2015 CA decision that upheld an earlier ruling of the Intellectual Property Office in Crocodile’s favor.

Article continues after this advertisement

“The Court holds that there are pronounced differences between Lacoste’s and Crocodile’s marks, [which make] them distinguishable from one another,” the high tribunal said in the decision dated Nov. 6, 2023, but made public on Sept. 10.

Article continues after this advertisement

The ruling was penned by Associate Justice Antonio Kho.

In December 1996, Crocodile filed a trademark application for the mark “crocodile and device,” but it wasn’t until 2004 when Lacoste opposed it.

Article continues after this advertisement

The French brand argued it would be “greatly damaged” as the Singaporean brand’s design was “confusingly similar or identical” to its own mark.

But the high court said Lacoste failed to prove this.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

“As a matter of fact… Crocodile even facilitated the registration of Lacoste’s mark in different jurisdictions by giving consent to Lacoste’s entry in countries where Crocodile first registered its mark,” it said.

TAGS: dispute, logo, Supreme Court

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our newsletter!

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

© Copyright 1997-2024 INQUIRER.net | All Rights Reserved

This is an information message

We use cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more here.