Philippine
Refining co vs. Ng Sam and Director of Patents
G.R. No. L-26676 July 30, 1982
FACTS:
The sole issue raised in this petition for review of the decision of the Director of patents is
whether or not the product of respondent, Ng Sam, which is ham, and those of petitioner
consisting of lard, butter, cooking oil and soap are so related that the use of the same trademark
"CAMIA" on said goods would likely result in confusion as to their source or origin.
RULING:
The Court held that the businesses of the parties are
non-competitive and their products so unrelated that the identical use of the
mark ‘Camia” was not likely to give rise to confusion, much less cause damage
to petitioner. The particular goods of the parties are so unrelated that
consumers would not in any probability mistake one as the source or origin of
the product of the other. Petitioner’s goods are basically derived from
vegetable oil and animal fats, while the product of respondent is processed
from pig's legs.Furthermore, respondent had on his product the business name "SAM'S
HAM AND BACON FACTORY" which would place no question on the origin of the
product.
The Court also held that the term subject to the case is not
uncommon in view of the fact that there were two others distinct businesses
bearing the same name. A trademark must be affirmative and definite,
significant and distinctive, capable to indicate origin. It was held that if a
mark is so commonplace that it cannot be readily distinguished from others,
then he who first adopted it cannot be injured by any subsequent appropriation
or imitation by others, and the public will not be deceived. What then is to be
reckoned with is the similarity of the products under the mark. The similarity
is not on the classification of the property or character of the product but on
the sameness of the actual product sold or manufactured. Such similarity is
wanting in this case.
