Courts' Attitude To Trademark Coexistence Agreement-Findings And Conclusions Based On Recent Judgements

To explore China's Court's attitude to trademark coexistence agreement in cases where trademarks are substantially similar, exclusive of identical trademarks, the authors review the Courts' latest binding judgements and summarize the Courts' perspectives in these cases. We hope this article will be helpful for applicants seeking trademark protection in China. The Courts' judgements reflect the following perspectives.

1. Even the marks are substantially similar, the Court accepts coexistence agreement on the precondition that there is no prejudice to public interests. This is full respect for the private-law characteristics of trademarks.

On April 14, 2020, Beijing High People's Court made a final judgment in the administrative litigation for the review of the refusal of "", in which the Letter of Consent issued by the owner of the cited marks "Emerald" and "EMERALD PERFORMANCE MATERIALS" was accepted.¹