Legal argument
Get the information - control the situation!
Main > Contact us > Intellectual property, business law services in the Eastern Europe and Lithuanian > Russian

What's new?

Another opposition won

On August 23, 2011 the Appeal Division of the State Patent Bureau has issued decision in Opposition No. 2648. Our Client, JUWÖ Engineering GmbH, was owner of the Community trademark ThermoBlock (reg. No. 004836524). The trademarks was the ground in opposition against Lithuanian trademark “TERMOBLOCK”, fig (reg. No. 62628) …READ MORE

Our seminars, our articles, articles about us

October 3, 2011
Comment of a lawyer: Registration of trademarks (Teisininko komentaras: Prekės ženklo registravimas)

Article about unfair registration of trademarks with intentions to use the registrations for profits from careless businessmen. The article overviews possible risks and suggest possible solutions …READ MORE

Provider of MEZON internet was fined

Competition Council of the Republic of Lithuania on February 3, 2011 adopted decision where the Council recognized that advertisement of “Mezon” (owner of the trademark and provider of the services is AB LIETUVOS RADIJO IR TELEVIZIJOS CENTRAS) internet was not enough comprehensive. The advertisement said that consumers can use the internet for 19 Litas a month, however the advertisement hasn’t indicated that there were additional clauses – the agreement’s term was two years, there was additional “initial fee” and the tariff of 19 Litas per month was not termless.

Taking into consideration above, provide of “Mezon” internet was fined by 10 thousand Litas.

Recent decisions of the State Patent Bureau

The opponent: CHAMPION Products Europe Limited (Ireland)
The applicant: UAB „OLIFĖJA“ (Lithuania)
Earlier trademark: CTM reg. No. 003509221 “BONBON” (fig)  

Trademark of the opponent:

CTM Reg.No. 005777834



Lithuanian domain name practice update

Not so long ago unfair registration of domain names in Lithuania was quite a big problem and headache for trademark and company name owners. The first case in Lithuania regarding unfair registration of domain name was solved only in 2004 (UAB Kristiana v. Kęstutis Mikoliūnas; domain name in question – “”). In this decision the court for the first time decided that earlier trademark rights owner can take actions against unfair registration of domain name.

Since 2004 several cases reading the domain names have been solved. However the court still faces the same problems... READ MORE

The Competition Council rules on misleading

Competition Council of the Republic of Lithuania on June 23, 2010 adopted decision regarding alleged misleading advertisement of company “TAMRO VAISTINE”. The mentioned company used following phrase in their advertisement: “In the “Family pharmacy” on weekends everything is 15% cheaper” ... READ MORE

New domain name registration rules for Lithuania

Lithuanian Government has adopted new rules for usage of Lithuanian official country name in .lt domain names. In fact this is the first legal act whatsoever to regulate registration of domain names in Lithuania. Although Lithuanian domain name registry has rules, theses rules, although applied, are not legal act, but a part of the domain name registration agreement ... READ MORE

New domain name litigation practice in Lithuania

Litigation in Lithuania against cybersquaters started few years ago with a case regarding domain name “š”. Owner of the domain name registered it and contacted owner of well-known trademark “ŠVYTURYS” in Lithuania – UAB “Švyturys – Utenos alus”, which is one of the biggest breweries in the Baltic states.  The registrant offered to sell the domain name to the UAB “Švyturys – Utenos alus”... READ MORE

Ammended regulation for attorneys in Poland

Poland adopted new regulations for attorneys, which secures interests of the clients even stronger, but also liberalizes activities of the attorneys. According to the new regulation, sums of money received by the attorney, must be deposited into bank account, separate from other accounts of the attorney. The attorney has no right to cover his office and legal fees from the deposited amount.  ... READ MORE