Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Helsingin HO 05.09.1984 238 AI generated

Trademark registration priority established trademark name cancellation of business name registration.

Case Number Helsingin HO 05.09.1984 238
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant's request to cancel the respondent's business name registration. The Regional Court had previously cancelled the registration because the parties competed in the microcomputer field and the trademark application preceded the business name registration. The appellate court upheld this decision, confirming that the applicant's earlier right to the mark justified the cancellation under the Business Names Act.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

s. 19 of the Business Names Act; where a trademark application precedes a business name registration in a competing field, the earlier trademark right serves as the legal basis for cancelling the business name registration.

Keywords

AI generated
trademark priority business name cancellation competing business fields earlier right protection Business Names Act Regional Court decision appellate review

Cited Legislation

AI generated
s. 19 of the Business Names Act
AI generated
market_2022_H448
MAO:H448/2022
market_2025_524
Trademark appeal dismissed; court found likelihood of confusion due to visual similarity despite different meanings.
market_2018_493
Trademark appeal dismissed because the applicant failed to prove a justified reason for using a mark similar to a well-known BMW mark.
market_2021_141
Market Court dismisses appeal as trademark frames differ in dominant features preventing confusion despite shared background.
market_2023_92
Trademark court allows appeal against EUIPO decision due to confusion risk in similar services.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Kantaja A:lle oli 12.2.1979 jätetyn hakemuksen perusteella 5.2.1982 rekisteröity tavaramerkki "Computerland" tavaraluokasssa 35. Vastaaja B:n toiminimi "Computerland" oli rekisteröity 16.11.1979. Kantaja A vaati RO:ssa toiminimilain 19 §:n säännösten perusteella B:n toiminimen rekisteröinnin kumoamista.

RO: Asianosaiset kilpailivat keskenään liiketoiminnassa mikrotietokonealalla, joten heidän rekisteröimänsä "Computerland"- tavaramerkki toisaalta ja samanniminen toiminimi toisaalta olivat kollisiotilanteessa. Koska A:n tavaramerkkihakemus oli saapunut rekisteriviranomaiselle ennen B:n toiminimen rekisteröintiä ja A siis voi vedota aikaisempaan oikeusperusteeseen, RO toiminimilain 19 §:n 1 momentin nojalla kumosi B:n toiminimen rekisteröinnin.

HO: Ei muutosta.

Läsnä: Voutilainen, E.Luova ja Martimo (apuj.) Esittelijä: Mäkinen

Lainvoimainen