Newsletter
MAY APPEALS BE WITHDRAWN IN TRADEMARK OPPOSITION LITIGATION?
Article 113 Paragraph 1 of the Code of Admin-istrative Procedure (CAP) provides that a suit filed in the High Administrative Court may be withdrawn in whole or in part at any time before the judgment in the case becomes irrevocable. But Article 114 Paragraph 1 provides that such withdrawal is not allowed if it would be against the public interest. Article 263 applies the same provisions to appeals against judgments of the High Administrative Court. In the past, however, the High Administrative Court and the Supreme Administrative Court had never cited Article 114 Paragraph 1 as grounds for refusing leave to withdraw administrative litigation in a trademark case.
In a 2003 appeal judgment in a trademark oppo-sition case, the Supreme Administrative Court for the first time cited Article 114 Paragraph 1 in refusing to allow the appellant (the plaintiff in the original case) to withdraw this appeal. The court stated that a trademark serves to distinguish the origin of goods, and involves the interest of the consuming public in being able to correctly identify goods. Withdrawing the litigation might allow an unlawful administrative decision to remain in force, which would be against the public interest.
Subsequently, however, in a 2003 appeal in an-other trademark opposition case, the Supreme Administrative Court allowed the appellant (an interested party in the trial court) to withdraw his appeal. Thus, to date the Supreme Administra-tive Court has not adopted a consistent view on this issue. As yet there have been no cases in which the Taipei High Administrative Court has refused leave to withdraw an administrative litigation for a trademark case.