如何统筹针对欧盟和英国相同商标的行动

有时候，仅对英国或欧盟商标其中之一提出异议，就可能取得胜利成果。如果有必要同时提起异议，须行动得当，针对性地满足每个司法管辖区的要求。行动还需协调一致，以避免矛盾和重复工作，并确保最大的成功几率。就这些方面，我们在下文提供了一些指引。

Sometimes it may be possible to oppose only one of the UK and EU applications to achieve a successful outcome. Where it is necessary to run simultaneous oppositions, any action taken should be appropriate and targeted to the requirements of each jurisdiction. It also needs to be aligned to avoid contradiction and duplication of effort and to ensure the best chance of success. We have provided some guidance on these aspects below.

在某些情况下，可以只集中精力处理一个地区的异议，并藉此施压对方撤回或变更在另一个地的申请（而不必提两件异议），从而节省费用。

In some cases, it may be possible to save on costs by focusing only on the opposition in one territory and using the leverage of this to force the withdrawal or amendment of the other application (without having to file two oppositions).

商标权利人应检查每件相关商标申请的进度，以选定最合适提出异议的地区。例如，当欧盟申请已经公告了可以提异议了而英国申请还没审查完时，那么在英国采取行动就没那么迫切。

Trade mark owners should check the relative progress of each application to decide the most suitable jurisdiction. For example, if the EU application has been published for opposition purposes, but the UK application has not yet been examined, action may not be so urgent in the UK.

评估应优先在哪个地区采取行动时，商标权利人还应考虑以下因素：

• 自己在哪个地区更占据相对优势地位

• 哪个地区的程序对自己更有利或更不利（比如，欧盟异议程序给予当事人更长的时间来进行友好协商以达成和解，而英国异议程序则要求申请人必须提交答辩）

• 资金预算

In assessing which action to prioritise, trade mark owners should also consider:

• The relative strength of their position in each territory

• Whether the procedure in either forum is more or less favourable (e.g. the EU opposition process allows longer for amicable negotiation, whereas the UK opposition process requires the Applicant to file a defence)

• Their budget

以哪些商标作为权利基础、针对哪些商品和服务提出异议，这些选择可能会因欧盟、英国市场的重要性的不同以及双方在此二区域的权利相对优势地位的不同而有所变化。

Selecting which marks to rely on and which goods and services to oppose may vary according to the commercial importance of the EU and UK respectively, as well as the relative strength of the parties’ position.

异议人在许多案件里可以采用相似的异议理由，从而节省准备各单独程序所需理由的成本。不过，必须意识到，每个地区在异议基础、理由、形式上的要求可能不同。例如，在先商标可能在欧盟有名，在英国则没名，反之亦然。类似地，在英国提异议需提交比较详细的理由，而欧盟则不然。

In many cases, opposing parties can rely on similar arguments and therefore make some cost savings in preparing arguments in each set of proceedings. However, it is important to be aware that grounds, arguments and requirements may vary for each jurisdiction. For example, an earlier trade mark may enjoy a reputation in the EU but not in the UK and vice versa. Likewise, there is a requirement to submit more detailed arguments at the point of filing a UK opposition than is the case in the EU.

欧盟、英国的异议程序对证据的要求不同。英国对证据形式有普遍的严格要求，而欧盟知识产权局（EUIPO）则严格优先考虑某些形式的证据。虽然如此，通过证据收集进行统筹安排，仍然可以节省成本。

Evidence requirements are different for EU and UK proceedings. The UK has strict evidence format requirements, whereas the EUIPO strictly prioritises certain forms of evidence. Nonetheless, it is possible to save on costs by coordinating evidence collection.

将欧盟、英国一并考虑，统一进行谈判和解，也许会带来特别的好处。用对方的语言进行沟通、直接与最终决策者（取决于对方企业的总部所在地）身边的人接洽，谈判也可能更有效率。不过，在不同地区，各方可能占据不同的优势地位，在进行谈判以及寻求最有效的和解策略时需考虑到这一点。

There may be particular benefits to exploring settlement negotiations centrally, taking into account the EU and UK at the same time. It can also be more efficient to communicate in the language of the other party and to liaise directly with a contact close to the ultimate decision-makers (i.e. depending on where the entity is headquartered). However, the strength of parties’ positions may vary in different territories, so parties need to consider this when conducting negotiations and considering the most effective strategy for settlement.