Review of court practice of the Supreme Court for 2015 № 2 (affirmed by the Presidium of the Supreme Court on 26 June 2015)
- Court:
- Supreme Court
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Plenary Session of the Supreme Commercial Court of 18 July 2014 № 51 “On Certain Questions Arising at Consideration of Disputes with Participation of Organisations Effectuating the Collective Management of Authors’ and Neighboring Rights”
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 19 November 2013 № 5861/13 in the case The company “First Musical Publishing House” vs The company “MTF Production”
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether the use of musical composition in its original form (i.e. without remaking), but as a part of a complex object (a mock theatrical performance), by parodists constitutes the violation of the exclusive right to such composition?
- Dissenting opinion:
- Valiavina Elena
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 19 November 2013 № 9152/13 in the case The Russian Author’s Society (RAO) vs Tax inspection № 3 for the City of Moscow
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether RAO must pay profit tax on the amounts of author’s remuneration which have not been distributed by RAO to authors?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Plenary Session of the Supreme Commercial Court of 2 July 2013 № 50 “On Making Changes to the Judgment of the Plenary Session of the Supreme Commercial Court of the Russian Federation of 8 October 2012 № 60 “On Certain Questions Arising in Connection with the Creation of Court for Intellectual Property Rights within the System of Commercial Courts”
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 4 December 2012 № 11277/12 in the case The company “Melnitsa XXI vek” vs The Russian Author’s Society (RAO)
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: how specific should be the subject of a license contract concluded under Art 1243 of the Civil Code between the user of a musical composition (licensee) and the accredited organization for the management of rights on the collective basis (RАО), in order to be recognised as being agreed upon?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 20 November 2012 № 8953/12 in the case The company “Oktiabrskoe pole” vs The company “Trading house “Perekrestok”
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether the seller of a magazine, in which an object of intellectual property right (specifically, a photo) was placed may be held liable for it?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 13 November 2012 № 6813/12 in the case The entrepreneur Sergey Chudov vs The Vladivostok customs office
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether customs office was right in suspending the importation of goods with a trade mark registered in the customs database of IP rights, provided that the first sale of such goods has already taken place in another country?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Plenary Session of the Supreme Commercial Court № 59 and Judgment of the Plenary Session of the Supreme Commercial Court № 60 of 8 October 2012
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Both judgments elucidate the issues connected to the creation of the Court for Intellectual Property Rights within the system of commercial courts.
Subject areas:
Decision of the Supreme Commercial Court of 1 October 2012 № ВАС-6474/12 upon the application of Jan Topol, a citizen of Czech Republic
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: the legality of prohibition imposed by Rospatent upon appointing advocates as representatives of non-residents (both natural and legal persons) in patent disputes, whereas residents are permitted to hire advocates as well as patent attorneys.
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of Supreme Commercial Court of 11 September 2012 № 5939/12 in the case The company “Hame s.r.o” (Czech Republic) vs The company “Ruzkom” et al.
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether a factory violates an exclusive right to another’s trademark, when it packages its own goods with the packing, on which a designation, confusingly similar to this trade mark, has been put not by the factory itself, but by a third person (the supplier of the packing)?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 26 June 2012 № 17769/11 in the case The Baltic Customs Office vs The company “Optimum-Kargo”
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether it constitutes an unlawful use of the trademark on the part of an importer to place a designation which is confusingly similar to the trademark upon shipment-related documentation (such as invoice, packing list and compliance certificate)?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 28 February 2012 № 12436/11 in the case The company “Konsortium-PIK” et al. vs The Federal Service for Intellectual Property, Patents and Trademarks
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether a designation which is confusingly similar to an international nonproprietary name may be registered as a trademark?
Subject areas:
Judgment of the Presidium of the Supreme Commercial Court of 31 January 2012 № 11025/11 in the case Research-and-production company "Kombioteks" vs The company "Serum Institute of India Ltd"
- Court:
- Supreme Commercial Court
- Point of law: whether the invention previously patented in a foreign state ought to be taken into account when determining the level of technique within the procedure of consideration of patent application with regard to a supposedly equivalent invention?
Subject areas:
Have you spotted a typo?
Highlight it, click Ctrl+Enter and send us a message. Thank you for your help!
To be used only for spelling or punctuation mistakes.