Tenergo: Decision of the Supreme Court 8 March 2017 – Case No. 31 Cdo 3375/2015

Provided the owner uses its trade mark in a way that it fulfils the defining features of unfair competition, it is necessary then to protect those who are affected by such conduct against such use in the manner as stated in Sec. 2988, first sentence, of the Civil Code, as well as by imposing the obl...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law 2019-03, Vol.50 (3), p.398-404
Main Author: TENERGO Brno, a.s. v. Team ENERGO s.r.o. (previously tenergo team s.r.o.) Civil Code, Sec. 2988, first sentence
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Decision • Unfair Competition Law
Intellectual Property
IT Law
Law
Law and Criminology
Media Law
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page 404
container_issue 3
container_start_page 398
container_title IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law
container_volume 50
creator TENERGO Brno, a.s. v. Team ENERGO s.r.o. (previously tenergo team s.r.o.) Civil Code, Sec. 2988, first sentence
description Provided the owner uses its trade mark in a way that it fulfils the defining features of unfair competition, it is necessary then to protect those who are affected by such conduct against such use in the manner as stated in Sec. 2988, first sentence, of the Civil Code, as well as by imposing the obligation to refrain from using the registered trade mark. The right to a trade name pertains to the so-called rights to designation and it is considered to be one of the industrial rights and therefore, in disputes involving claims arising therefrom, the factually and territorially competent first instance court shall be the Municipal Court in Prague, which decides in specialised panels composed of a Presiding Judge and two judges. …
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s40319-019-00804-1
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>crossref_sprin</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1007_s40319_019_00804_1</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>10_1007_s40319_019_00804_1</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c871-e9e16a7a98d5f3394d11a8d1d0ce466ae487abc873ef58caa675fee973627f5d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9j81KBDEQhBtx0WF3X8B3iHZP_o-y-AcLXuYe4qSzuOiMJHjw7c0wnm0o-lJV1AdwQ3hLiPauKpTkBS5Ch0rQBXQ9eS2wl_YSOkRywjutr2Ff6xnbeeWsog6uBp64nOYdbHL8qLz_-1sYHh-Gw7M4vj69HO6PYnSWBHsmE230LukspVeJKLpECUdWxkRurfGtWSVn7cYYjdWZ2Vtpept1klvo19qxzLUWzuGrvH_G8hMIwwITVpiAixaYQC0k11Bt5unEJZzn7zK1mf-lfgG6hkqd</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Tenergo: Decision of the Supreme Court 8 March 2017 – Case No. 31 Cdo 3375/2015</title><source>Springer Link</source><creator>TENERGO Brno, a.s. v. Team ENERGO s.r.o. (previously tenergo team s.r.o.) Civil Code, Sec. 2988, first sentence</creator><creatorcontrib>TENERGO Brno, a.s. v. Team ENERGO s.r.o. (previously tenergo team s.r.o.) Civil Code, Sec. 2988, first sentence</creatorcontrib><description>Provided the owner uses its trade mark in a way that it fulfils the defining features of unfair competition, it is necessary then to protect those who are affected by such conduct against such use in the manner as stated in Sec. 2988, first sentence, of the Civil Code, as well as by imposing the obligation to refrain from using the registered trade mark. The right to a trade name pertains to the so-called rights to designation and it is considered to be one of the industrial rights and therefore, in disputes involving claims arising therefrom, the factually and territorially competent first instance court shall be the Municipal Court in Prague, which decides in specialised panels composed of a Presiding Judge and two judges. …</description><identifier>ISSN: 0018-9855</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2195-0237</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s40319-019-00804-1</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg</publisher><subject>Decision • Unfair Competition Law ; Intellectual Property ; IT Law ; Law ; Law and Criminology ; Media Law</subject><ispartof>IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 2019-03, Vol.50 (3), p.398-404</ispartof><rights>Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition, Munich 2019</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,27906,27907</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>TENERGO Brno, a.s. v. Team ENERGO s.r.o. (previously tenergo team s.r.o.) Civil Code, Sec. 2988, first sentence</creatorcontrib><title>Tenergo: Decision of the Supreme Court 8 March 2017 – Case No. 31 Cdo 3375/2015</title><title>IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law</title><addtitle>IIC</addtitle><description>Provided the owner uses its trade mark in a way that it fulfils the defining features of unfair competition, it is necessary then to protect those who are affected by such conduct against such use in the manner as stated in Sec. 2988, first sentence, of the Civil Code, as well as by imposing the obligation to refrain from using the registered trade mark. The right to a trade name pertains to the so-called rights to designation and it is considered to be one of the industrial rights and therefore, in disputes involving claims arising therefrom, the factually and territorially competent first instance court shall be the Municipal Court in Prague, which decides in specialised panels composed of a Presiding Judge and two judges. …</description><subject>Decision • Unfair Competition Law</subject><subject>Intellectual Property</subject><subject>IT Law</subject><subject>Law</subject><subject>Law and Criminology</subject><subject>Media Law</subject><issn>0018-9855</issn><issn>2195-0237</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9j81KBDEQhBtx0WF3X8B3iHZP_o-y-AcLXuYe4qSzuOiMJHjw7c0wnm0o-lJV1AdwQ3hLiPauKpTkBS5Ch0rQBXQ9eS2wl_YSOkRywjutr2Ff6xnbeeWsog6uBp64nOYdbHL8qLz_-1sYHh-Gw7M4vj69HO6PYnSWBHsmE230LukspVeJKLpECUdWxkRurfGtWSVn7cYYjdWZ2Vtpept1klvo19qxzLUWzuGrvH_G8hMIwwITVpiAixaYQC0k11Bt5unEJZzn7zK1mf-lfgG6hkqd</recordid><startdate>20190315</startdate><enddate>20190315</enddate><creator>TENERGO Brno, a.s. v. Team ENERGO s.r.o. (previously tenergo team s.r.o.) Civil Code, Sec. 2988, first sentence</creator><general>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20190315</creationdate><title>Tenergo</title></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c871-e9e16a7a98d5f3394d11a8d1d0ce466ae487abc873ef58caa675fee973627f5d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Decision • Unfair Competition Law</topic><topic>Intellectual Property</topic><topic>IT Law</topic><topic>Law</topic><topic>Law and Criminology</topic><topic>Media Law</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>TENERGO Brno, a.s. v. Team ENERGO s.r.o. (previously tenergo team s.r.o.) Civil Code, Sec. 2988, first sentence</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><aucorp>TENERGO Brno, a.s. v. Team ENERGO s.r.o. (previously tenergo team s.r.o.) Civil Code, Sec. 2988, first sentence</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Tenergo: Decision of the Supreme Court 8 March 2017 – Case No. 31 Cdo 3375/2015</atitle><jtitle>IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law</jtitle><stitle>IIC</stitle><date>2019-03-15</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>50</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>398</spage><epage>404</epage><pages>398-404</pages><issn>0018-9855</issn><eissn>2195-0237</eissn><abstract>Provided the owner uses its trade mark in a way that it fulfils the defining features of unfair competition, it is necessary then to protect those who are affected by such conduct against such use in the manner as stated in Sec. 2988, first sentence, of the Civil Code, as well as by imposing the obligation to refrain from using the registered trade mark. The right to a trade name pertains to the so-called rights to designation and it is considered to be one of the industrial rights and therefore, in disputes involving claims arising therefrom, the factually and territorially competent first instance court shall be the Municipal Court in Prague, which decides in specialised panels composed of a Presiding Judge and two judges. …</abstract><cop>Berlin/Heidelberg</cop><pub>Springer Berlin Heidelberg</pub><doi>10.1007/s40319-019-00804-1</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0018-9855
ispartof IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 2019-03, Vol.50 (3), p.398-404
issn 0018-9855
2195-0237
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1007_s40319_019_00804_1
source Springer Link
subjects Decision • Unfair Competition Law
Intellectual Property
IT Law
Law
Law and Criminology
Media Law
title Tenergo: Decision of the Supreme Court 8 March 2017 – Case No. 31 Cdo 3375/2015
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-17T09%3A27%3A32IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-crossref_sprin&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Tenergo:%20Decision%20of%20the%20Supreme%20Court%208%20March%202017%20%E2%80%93%20Case%20No.%2031%20Cdo%203375/2015&rft.jtitle=IIC%20-%20International%20Review%20of%20Intellectual%20Property%20and%20Competition%20Law&rft.aucorp=TENERGO%20Brno,%20a.s.%20v.%20Team%20ENERGO%20s.r.o.%20(previously%20tenergo%20team%20s.r.o.)%20Civil%20Code,%20Sec.%202988,%20first%20sentence&rft.date=2019-03-15&rft.volume=50&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=398&rft.epage=404&rft.pages=398-404&rft.issn=0018-9855&rft.eissn=2195-0237&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s40319-019-00804-1&rft_dat=%3Ccrossref_sprin%3E10_1007_s40319_019_00804_1%3C/crossref_sprin%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c871-e9e16a7a98d5f3394d11a8d1d0ce466ae487abc873ef58caa675fee973627f5d3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true