A Case Study of VON DUTCH (Ⅱ)

• Citation: jd0155
• Date: 26 January 2018
• Published date: 26/01/2018
• Subject Matter: Intellectual Property

2020/11/25 A Case Study of VON DUTCH (Ⅱ) | China Law Insight

https://www.chinalawinsight.com/2018/01/articles/intellectual-property/a-case-study-of-von-dutch-ⅱ/ 1/4

CHINA LAW INSIGHT

A Case Study of VON DUTCH (Ⅱ)

By King & Wood Mallesons on January 26, 2018

By Lin Jiuchu, Zhang Jiaqi and Xu Huiwen King & Wood Mallesons’ IP group

Case profile

On 10 June 2015, ROYER BRANDS INTERNATIONAL S.A.R.L. (“Royer”) filed an

application with the PRC Trademark Office (“CTMO”) to register trademark No. 17165854

“ ” for designated goods in Class 14. This class includes unprocessed and semi-

processed precious metals, jewelry boxes, sleeve buttons, cufflinks, jewelry, watches and

so on.

The CTMO refused the application on the grounds that “Dutch” means “of the

Netherlands”.[1] Under Chinese law, names of foreign countries are not permitted to be

used as trademarks. Royer appealed the CTMO’s decision to the Trademark Review and

Adjudication Board (“TRAB”). TRAB dismissed the application on the grounds that “the

word part of the trademark ‘VonDutch and Design’ implies ‘from the Netherlands’, and

may mislead the public as to the place of origin of such goods when designated for use

on goods including jewelry. Therefore the trademark application is prohibited under Article

10.1.7 of the PRC Trademark Law”.

Royer then initiated administrative litigation. After hearing the case, the Beijing Intellectual

Property Court found in favor of Royer and overturned the decision of TRAB. TRAB