KIELECKI MAYONNAISE and its PACKAGING
Act of 16 April 1993 on combating unfair competition (Dz.U. z 2022 r. poz. 1233 as amended)
link to provision: https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/download.xsp/WDU19930470211/U/D19930211Lj.pdf
Artykuł 3 Combating unfair competition
1. The act of unfair competition shall be the activity contrary to the law or good practices which threatens or infringes the interest of another entrepreneur or customer.
2. The acts of unfair competition shall be in particular:
1) misleading designation of the company;
2) false or deceitful indication of the geographical origin of products or services;
3) misleading indication of products or services;
4) infringement of the business secrecy;
5) inducing to dissolve or to not execute the agreement;
6) imitating products, slandering or dishonest praise, impeding access to the market;
7) bribery of a public office holder;
8) unfair or prohibited advertising;
9) organising a system of pyramid selling;
10) conducting or organising activities in a consortium system;
11) unreasonably extending the payment terms for supplied goods or rendered services;
12) operating online intermediary and search engine services within the meaning of Article 2(2) and (5) of Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on promoting fairness and transparency for business users using online intermediary services (OJ L 186, 11.07.2019, p. 57), hereinafter referred to as ‘Regulation 2019/1150’, in breach of that Regulation.
Artykuł 10 Designation of a product
1. Such indication of products or services or its lack, which may mislead customers in relation to the origin, quantity, quality, components, manufacturing process, usefulness, possible application, repair, maintenance and another significant features of products or services as well as concealing the risks connected with their use, shall be the act of unfair competition.
2. Releasing for free circulation products in the packing which may cause effects referred to in paragraph 1 above shall be the act of unfair competition, unless the use of such packing is justified by technical reasons.
Thesis of the judgment of 2012-05-23 (ref. no. IX GC 86/10) of the District Court in Cracow taken by a single-member panel:
- Małgorzata STANASZEK (Presiding judge)
The use of the word ŚWIĘTOKRZYSKI on the label of a mayonnaise product whose place of origin is a town located in the Lesser Poland (Małopolskie) province constitutes use of a false geographical indication. Since the trade mark owned by the claimant indicated Kielce, a town located in the Świętokrzyskie Province, the trade mark used by the respondent could have misled customers who wanted to buy the claimant’s product.
Unlawful use of another person’s trade mark may constitute both infringement of trade mark regulations and unfair competition.
The use of a similar marking remains an activity contrary to good practice.
Thesis of the judgment of 2013-01-15 (ref. no. I ACa 1268/12) of the Appeal Court in Cracow taken by:
- Józef WĄSIK (Presiding judge)
- Teresa RAK (Judge)
- Władysław PAWLAK (Judge)
For the determination of an act of unfair competition provided for in Article 10(1) of the Act on Combating Unfair Competition, it is not the comparison of the marking of the products used by a certain entity with the trade mark registered in favour of another entity that is decisive, but the comparison of that marking with the marking of goods used by another entity.
The action of the respondent committing an act of unfair competition in relation to the claimant cannot be sanctioned by a decision on granting the trademark right, in the period between its issuance and the cancellation of the trademark right.
