Three-Year Post Registration Opposition Period Interpreted

 The Iranian Appellate Court upheld the decision of the First Instance Court for the cancellation of the Octiran’s trademark registration in the case of (Octanorm-Vertriebs GmbH vs. Octiran Ltd.). Octiran lost the case because it failed to establish that Octanorm was aware of the registration and failed to file an opposition within the three-year period prescribed by Article 22 of the Iranian Trademark Law. This would mean, according to Octiran’s claim, that Octanorm has no legal power to cancel the registration after the 3-year period beginning as of the date of registration.
 
 Octanorm’s case against Octiran was for the cancellation of the trademark registration for OCTANORM (word and design). While latter was able to sell Octanorm’s products in the Iranian marketplace, by a license agreement within a defined period, it had no right to register the trademark OCTANORM & design in its own name.
 
 Based on the existing facts, particularly prior and continuous worldwide use of the trademark by the Octanorm, the First Instance court ruled in its favor, granted it the registration and cancelled the registration of the trademark by Octiran.
 
 The Court of Appeal further upheld the First Instance court’s decision and emphasized Octanorm’s rights to the trademark carrying its name.