On appeal, the Court of Appeals rendered a decision on July 31, 1961, declaring Cazeas elected by a plurality of one (1) vote over petitioner Tajanlangit. 160054), No-spouse, no-marriage employment policies. 2 argued the defendants had constructive notice of the abstract of judgment through application of the doctrine of idem sonans. Ballot Exhibit T-78. The Decision of the Director of Patents, referred to by the CA, disposed as follows: "WHEREFORE, the Petition is GRANTED. - J. Brion, G.R. These ballots were, therefore, correctly admitted. The Supreme Court held: As to the syllabication and sound of the two trade-names "Sapolin" and . In trademark law, the term designates a name that sounds close enough to a registered trademark to create confusion among consumers and infringe that mark, so the Steinway company was able to . 154514. Based on the evidence presented, this Court concurs in the findings of the Bureau of Patents that respondent had actually used the trademark and the devices in question prior to petitioner's use of its own. (Agbayani, II Commercial Laws of the Philippines, 1978, p. 514, citing Uy Hong Mo v. Titay & Co., et al., Dec. No. Section 4(d) of R.A. No. No. The Court of Appeals ruled that said name is only a stray vote and does not invalidate the whole ballot. An examination of the products in question shows that their dominant features are gold checkered lines against a predominantly black background and a representation of a sock with a magnifying glass. 7 . The fact that two trademarks are idem sonans may be used to establish the likelihood of confusion on the part of consumers in an infringement case. L-19201. Petitioner also seeks the reversal of the June 30, 1999 CA Resolution3 denying its own Motion for Reconsideration. The rule of idem sonans is that absolute accuracy in spelling names is not required in a legal document or proceedings either civil or criminal; that if the name, as spelled in the document, though different from the correct spelling thereof, conveys to the ear, when pronounced according to the commonly accepted methods, a sound practically identical with the correct name as commonly pronounced,the name thus given is a sufficient identification of the individual referred to, and no advantage can be taken of the clerical error. The old judgment of R v Davis[2] provides: The modern case of Re Vidiofusion Ltd[3] establishes a four-stage test when a name of a company is spelled differently in writing: Remnants of this common law doctrine exist today in the United States in the Uniform Commercial Code. No. No. 12 Villaflor v. CA, 280 SCRA 297, 329-330, October 9, 1997, per Panganiban, J. Such similar-sounding words are called a homonym, while similar-sounding phrases or names would be a holorime. Consequently, the decision rendered by the Director of Patents dated September 3, 1990 is hereby AFFIRMED.". Clearly, petitioner violated the applicable trademark provisions during that time. In Emerald Garment Manufacturing Corporation v. Court of Appeals,14 this Court stated that in determining whether trademarks are confusingly similar, jurisprudence has developed two kinds of tests, the Dominancy Test15 and the Holistic Test.16 In its words: "In determining whether colorable imitation exists, jurisprudence has developed two kinds of tests the Dominancy Test applied in Asia Brewery, Inc. v. Court of Appeals and other cases and the Holistic Test developed in Del Monte Corporation v. Court of Appeals and its proponent cases. 13, Section 149, Revised Election Code). As that word appears written, it cannot be reasonably inferred that the intention of the voter was to mark the ballot. 8799; investment contracts. Furthermore, [petitioner]'s mark is only registered with the Supplemental Registry which gives no right of exclusivity to the owner and cannot overturn the presumption of validity and exclusiv[ity] given to a registered mark. 'GOLD TOE' and 'GOLD TOP' are printed in identical lettering. W. 540, 04 Am. An idem sonans name allows a pleading or other document (as a warrant) to be considered valid despite the minor misspelling of a name or other misidentification of a party. The last named officer drafted the decision under appeal which was in due court signed and issued by the Director of Patents (who never presided over any hearing) adversely against the respondent Amigo Manufacturing, Inc. as heretofore mentioned (supra, p.1). Powered byBlacks Law Dictionary, Free 2nd ed., and The Law Dictionary. The rule on idem sonans is also a test to resolve the confusing similarity of trademarks. In connection with the three ballots referred to above, respondent makes mention of ballot Exhibit C-1, which was declared null and void under the provision of paragraph 14, section 149 of the Revised Election Code, for containing a printed sticker of candidate Angel V. Sanchez pasted on the line for vice-governor. But the doctrine of idem sonans has been much enlarged by modern decisions, to conform to the growing rule that a variance, to be material, must be such as has misled the opposite party to his prejudice. This Court has consistently held that where there is no evidence that the name of a person or persons, not candidates, were written on the ballot for purposes of identification, said name or names shall be counted as stray vote but shall not invalidate the whole ballot in accordance with the express provision of paragraph 13, section 149, of the Revised Election Code. Reyes, J.B.L., J., took no part. ERNESTO TAJANLANGIT, petitioner, Post the Definition of idem sonans to Facebook, Share the Definition of idem sonans on Twitter. 2-3; rollo, pp. True, it would not be guilty of infringement on the basis alone of the similarity in the sound of petitioner's "Gold Top" with that of respondent's "Gold Toe." L-7704, December 14, 1954). Ballot Exhibit T-139. Is compulsory sterilization of criminals legal? On this ballot, the voter wrote the name "Juan C. Bajo" on the last line for councilors. No. 678-679) IDEM SONANS For purposes of illustration, the following "SKOAL" and "SKOL", . However, reversal will be required if the evidence shows that the names are patently incapable of being sounded the same. definitions of legal terms. 2 Rollo, pp. This Court must exercise an independent judgment as to whether the process sanctioned by the court of last resort of the state constituted due process of law; it is not bound by, nor can it merely accept, the decision of the state court on that question. Indeed, Section 20 of Republic Act 166 provides as follows: "Sec. In sum, petitioner has failed to show any reversible error on the part of the Court of Appeals. Consequently, Certificate of Registration No. Petitioner has failed to rebut this presumption. 1 Cromp. Article 9 of the UCC states that a financing statement shall not perfect a valid security interest if a name change would be "seriously misleading.". 8 . Upon examination of the ballot, we have noted that the names appearing on the 4th line for senators and on the lines for governor and vice-governor were written with different pencil. 139300 March 14, 2001. Surprisingly, petitioner never showed proof of CEEGEEFER's trademark registration. 419-421, cites, as coming within the purview of the idem sonans rule, Yusea and U-C-A, Steinway Pianos and Steinberg Pianos, and Seven-Up and Lemon-Up. This is the doctrine enunciated in the case of Tabiana v. Abordo, supra, which we believe is applicable to the ballot in question. This finding of fact made by the Court of Appeals based upon the evidence presented by the parties is no longer open for review by this Court (Hilao v. Bernados, supra). . A written judgment obtained by the husband of plaintiff administratrix misspelled the name of defendant judgment debtor. 119190; January 16, 1997), Retired top judge: 12 tips to pass the Bar exam, Did not finish the exam but she topped the bar. Patents apply to inventions and innovations, while copyrights apply to creative works. For When 'Lowdown Crook' Isn't Specific Enough. The Court of Appeals declared this ballot to be valid vote for Bernados saying that such Gothic lettering merely shows the desire of the voter to attain greater clearness and emphasis on his favorite candidate. Pearl & Dean v. Shoemart (Case Digest. On the other hand, respondent Cazeas counter-assigned errors involving 19 ballots.1wph1.t. This ballot contains the name of a non-candidate, Julia Valdelion, written on the second line for senators. The actual search results may reveal a debtor with a similar name and address which would put the researcher on notice to investigate further, which is the purpose of the filing in the first place. Apr 30, 1957 (101 Phil. keys to navigate, use enter to select. A supplemental register is provided for the registration because of some defects (conversely, defects which make a mark unregistrable on the principal register, yet do not bar them from the supplemental register.)' 20-22. Clearly, however, these dates are indicated in the Certificates of Registration. For this reason, this Court can no longer disturb the ruling of the Court of Appeals invalidating these three ballots. 2023. Mar 18, 2002 (429 Phil. This ballot contains the word "ietin" or "ilting" on the line for mayor. (d) Nothing in this paragraph shall entitle the owner of a registration granted under this section to sue for acts committed prior to the date on which his mark or trade-name was registered in this country unless the registration is based on use in commerce. "[1] Some examples are Seagrave/Segrave, Hutson/Hudson, Coonrad/Conrad, Keen/Keene, and Diadema/Deadema.[1]. 166 10 states that an applicant for a trademark or trade name shall, among others, state the date of first use. This finding of fact is no longer open for review by this Court; hence, the ruling of the Court of Appeals admitting these three ballots in favor of petitioner should be upheld (Hilao v. Bernados, supra). Examining the ratio decidendi in the case of Abrea v. Lloren, supra, the reason why this Court admitted ballots containing only a nickname was because 602 of the total number of 1,010 votes counted for Isabelo Lloren were cast by writing his nickname "Beloy"; and it had no alternative than to brush aside legal technicalities for the sake of "giving effect to the will of the people as freely and clearly expressed on the ballots." These two (2) ballots were declared invalid by the Court of Appeals as marked ballots, the distinguishing mark consisting of the names "Acsay" and "Lotilla" (Exh. Thus, applicable is the Union Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property adopted in Paris on March 20, 1883, otherwise known as the Paris Convention, of which the Philippines and the United States are members. 276-277. Such similar-sounding words are called a homonym, while similar-sounding phrases or names would be a holorime . We do not agree with the conclusion reached by the Court of Appeals. T-139) containing only the nickname of petitioner is not a valid vote for him. A trademark is any visible sign capable of distinguishing the goods (trademark) or services (service mark) of an enterprise and shall include a stamped or marked container of goods. 144104, June 29, 2004 (477 Phil. Upon the evidence aliunde presented by the parties, the Court of Appeals concluded "that the mark "olo" appearing on these ballots was placed thereon by some other person after they had been cast by their respective voters." The decision pivots on two point: the application of the rule of idem sonans and the existence of a confusing similarity in appearance between two trademarks (Rollo, p. 47252. [w]e find [respondent's] motion for reconsideration meritorious. No. [8]. Section 5-A of Republic Act No. 169211. . It appears that no evidence was presented to show that writing of the name Julia Valdelion was used as a means to identify this ballot. Leon Amdur, in his book "TradeMark Law and Practice", pp. This ballot was admitted by the Court of Appeals as valid for petitioner under the rule of idem sonans. [Respondent] is domiciled in the United States of America and is the lawful owner of several trademark registrations in the United States for the mark 'GOLD TOE'. The Bureau of Patents, however, did not rely on the idem sonans test alone in arriving at its conclusion. Section 5-A of Republic Act No. Jan 28, 1998 (349 Phil. No. The arguments of petitioner are incorrect. When the marks, products or services are similar, it is difficult to establish the "likelihood of confusion". Neither did petitioner present any evidence to indicate that they were fraudulently issued. This ballot is totally null and void. On the other hand, [petitioner's] trademark and device 'GOLD TOP, Linenized for Extra Wear' has the dominant color 'white' at the center and a 'blackish brown' background with a magnified design of the sock's garter, and is labeled 'Amigo Manufacturing Inc., Mandaluyong, Metro Manila, Made in the Philippines'. Since the trademark was successfully registered, there exists a prima facie presumption of the correctness of the contents thereof, including the date of first use. On the other hand, if there is a minor difference in spelling or an idem sonans, the error is not fatal, but only if it is not seriously misleading. 'GOLD TOP' blatantly incorporates petitioner's 'LINENIZED' which by itself is a registered mark."13. Hence, it is entitled to the protection of the Convention. Exhibit T-6 was, therefore, properly rejected as marked ballot. By virtue of the Philippines' membership to the Paris Union, trademark rights in favor of the [respondent] were created. As held in Del Monte Corporation v. Court of Appeals, 181 SCRA 410 (1990), the question is not whether the two articles are distinguishable by their label when set aside but whether the general confusion made by the article upon the eye of the casual purchaser who is unsuspicious and off his guard, is such as to likely result in confounding it with the original. Each case must be decided on its own merits". In view of the circumstances mentioned above obtaining in the case of Abrea v. Lloren, supra, we believe that the doctrine laid down therein regarding nickname is inapplicable to the instant case. Admittedly, the pronunciations of the two do not, by themselves, create confusion. No. At FindLaw.com, we pride ourselves on being the number one source of free legal information and resources on the web. The presumption lies in the similarity between the Phonology, or sounds of the correct name and the name as written. We agree with the ruling of the Court of Appeals that these last two ballots cannot be counted in favor of the respondent. It is not subject to opposition, although it may be cancelled after its issuance. No. 30, 1968.". 428), Jurisprudence on gender-free or homosexual rape, Cario v. Insular Government, 212 U.S. 449 (1909), G.R. In its Memorandum,7 petitioner raises the following issues for the consideration of this Court: Whether or not the Court of Appeals overlooked that petitioner's trademark was used in commerce in the Philippines earlier than respondent's actual use of its trademarks, hence the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the Decision of the Director of Patents dated September 3, 1990. Thus, the overall impression created is that the two products are deceptively and confusingly similar to each other. 3d 86, 547 N.E.2d 373 (1988) Rule: The arbitrary orthography and pronunciation given to proper names, and the variant spelling resulting from ignorance have led the courts to formulate the doctrine of "idem sonans," which means "sounding the same." Upon examination of the ballots in question, we agree with the conclusion made by the Court of Appeals that the writing of the aforesaid names "Acsay" and "Lotilla" in ballot Exhibit T-6 clearly appears to have been intended by the voter to serve as identification marks. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Idem_sonans&oldid=1147469360, Misspelling does not substantially change the placement of the name if placed in an, This page was last edited on 31 March 2023, at 04:48. Ballots Exhibits T-129, T-130 and T-131. No. 2. In most jurisdictions, courts and trademark offices decide fame on a case-by-case basis. (a) The application in the Philippines is filed within six months from the date on which the applica[tion] was first filed in the foreign country; and within three months from the date of filing or within such time as the Director shall in his discretion grant, the applicant shall furnish a certified copy of the application for or registration in the country of origin of the applicant, together with a translation thereof into English, if not in the English language; (b) The application conforms as nearly as practicable to the requirements of this Act, but use in commerce need not be alleged: (c) The rights acquired by third parties before the date of the filing of the first application in the foreign country shall in no way be affected by a registration obtained [for] an application filed under this paragraph; and. Respondent contends that said court committed error in invalidating this ballot invoking the provision on paragraph 13, section 149 of the Revised Election Code. (Idem sonans From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. The Idem Sonans Rule is particularly provided for under Section 211 (7) of the Omnibus Election Code, viz: Section 211. These three (3) ballots were rejected by the Court of Appeals as marked ballots on the strength of the evidence aliunde presented to the effect that the writing of the name "Guimson" on these three ballots pertaining to Precinct No. 6 This case was deemed submitted for resolution on April 17, 2000, upon receipt by this Court of respondent's Memorandum, signed by Attys. (Puma Sportschuhfabriken Rudolf Dassler K.G. The legal effect of an idem sonans is that the minor name difference shall have no bearing on the priority of debtors. Escobar v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 578 S.W.2d 139. No registration of a mark or trade-name in the Philippines by a person described in the preceding paragraph of this section shall be granted until such mark or trade-name has been registered in the country of origin of the applicant, unless the applicant alleges use in commerce. The husband then sought a declaratory judgment that defendants judgment debtor, realty purchaser, and lenders had constructive notice of the judgment lien under the doctrine of idem sonans because, when pronounced, the misspellings all sounded like the correct name. Justice demands we videotape all police interrogat G. R. No. In the absence of evidence aliunde that the aforementioned names of non-candidates were intended for purposes of identification, the same shall be considered a stray votes which shall not invalidate the whole ballot (Par. 1 Cromp. No. 8293, otherwise known as the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines ("IP Code"), defines a trademark as any visible sign capable of distinguishing the goods or services of an enterprise. Respondent claims that the Court Appeals committed error in declaring a mere nickname as a valid vote for petitioner. The FindLaw Legal Dictionary -- free access to over 8260 In general, trademarks apply to logos, symbols, and branding. And in the fourth place, there being no candidate for councilor by the name of Juan C. Bajo, said name shall be considered as a stray vote which shall not invalidate the whole ballot (Par 13, Section 149, Revised Election Code). The question at issue in cases of infringement of trademarks is whether the use of the marks involved would be likely to cause confusion or mistakes in the mind of the public or deceive purchasers. 450), G.R. Names 14, pp. This is a petition for review of a decision of the Court of Appeals declaring respondent Manuel L. Cazeas duly elected Mayor of Dao, Antique, with a total of 1,564 vote as against a total of 1,563 votes received by petitioner Ernesto Tajanlangit, or a plurality of one (1) vote. Duplication or imitation is not necessary; nor is it necessary that the infringing label should suggest an effort to imitate. Thus, in a later case, citing the case of Abrea v. Lloren, supra, it held that "As a general rule, isolated rotes in favor of a candidate designated by his nickname only, that is, not accompanied by his name or surname, are invalid (paragraph 9, Section 149 of the Revised Election Code (Campaner v. Alano, 46 O.G., 5029, December 16, 1948). We are however of the opinion that the ballot Exhibit T-94 wherein the name "Ledesma" was written in big printed letters can be validated as being merely the expression of the voter to clarify or emphasize his vote in favor of Ledesma. The Law Dictionary is not a law firm, and this page does not create an attorney-client or legal adviser relationship. 22792, which reversed, on reconsideration, its own September 29, 1998 Decision.2 The dispositive portion of the assailed Resolution reads as follows: "WHEREFORE, the Motion for Reconsideration is GRANTED, and the Decision dated September 29, 1998 REVERSED. Ballot Exhibit T-144. We also find that one (1) ballot (Exh. It ruled that the ballots are valid for petitioner. Delivered to your inbox! As to the actual date of first use by respondent of the four marks it registered, the seeming confusion may have stemmed from the fact that the marks have different dates of first use. L-18894 June 30, 1962. The fact that the marks were indeed registered by respondent shows that it did use them on the date indicated in the Certificate of Registration. Ballot Exhibits C-6, C-49, C-61, C-65, C-75 and C-76. Rule: The doctrine of idem sonans is that though a person's name has been inaccurately written, the identity of such person will be presumed from the similarity of sounds between the correct pronunciation and the pronunciation as written. 35--39, and 57 Am.Jur.2d, Names, Sec. (1) Nonetheless, over the years, the Supreme Court has fashioned two tests (ie, the dominancy and holistic tests) to determine whether a mark . 4-6; rollo, pp. Idem sonans applied only to issues of identity and would not relieve a judgment creditor of the obligation to file a proper abstract. [Latin] (Of words or names) sounding the same, regardless of spelling <the names Gene and Jean are idem sonans>. Source: Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law 1996. These four (4) ballots were rejected by the Court of Appeals on the ground that the words appearing on the line for Mayor on the first two ballots are, "totally undecipherable" and on the last two ballots, the words written an said line do not sufficiently identify the respondent. S. A. v. Director of Patents/ this Court unequivocally said that 635). With these changes, petitioner received a total of 1,565 valid votes. 143143 2 Comments 125 Shares Share One moose, two moose. In the first place, it is admitted that the word "bajo" has two meanings in Visayan dialect, i.e., "bad smell" and "a musical instrument." 190702. The use of two kinds of writing appearing in this ballot is a good example of the exception provided for in paragraph 18, Section 149 of the Revised Election Code, which provides that unless it should clearly appear that it has been deliberately put by the voter to serve as identification mark, the use of two or more kinds of writing shall be considered innocent and shall not invalidate the ballot. Furthermore, petitioner registered its trademark only with the supplemental register. (5 POINTS)Idem Sonans is a legal doctrine that presumes a person's identification even if his or her nameis misspelledand also it is a test that helps to resolve the confusing similarity oftrademarks. FindLaw.com Free, trusted legal information for consumers and legal professionals, SuperLawyers.com Directory of U.S. attorneys with the exclusive Super Lawyers rating, Abogado.com The #1 Spanish-language legal website for consumers, LawInfo.com Nationwide attorney directory and legal consumer resources. An application for registration of a mark or trade-name under the provisions of this Act filed by a person described in the first paragraph of this section who has previously duly filed an application for registration of the same mark or trade-name in one of the countries described in said paragraph shall be accorded the same force and effect as would be accorded to the same application if filed in the Philippines on the same date on which the application was first filed in such foreign country: Provided, That -. Requirements of the application. No. No. Petitioner Amigo Manufacturing Inc. challenges, under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, the January 14, 1999 Resolution1 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-GR SP No. Names Test in Determining if Names Are "Idem Sonans". G.R. Rodolfo Gilbang, Rustico Casia, M. Yadao, Fabian Rufina, Neptali Bulilan and Pausi Sapak. The fact that two trademarks are idem sonans may be used to establish the likelihood of confusion on the part of consumers in an infringement case. It is a legal doctrine in which a person's identity is presumed known despite the misspelling of his or her name. In determining if names are "idem sonans", the test is whether, though names are spelled differently, the attentive ear finds difficulty in distinguishing the names when pronounced. "12, Second Issue: The Court in Martin went on to state that this Court will refrain from disturbing on appeal a jury determination that the names in question were idem sonans. For the purposes of this section, the country of origin of the applicant is the country in which he has bona fide and effective industrial or commercial establishment, or if he has not such an establishment in the country in which he is domiciled, or if he has not a domicile in any of the countries described in the first paragraph of this section, the country of which he is a national. Accessed 1 May. - The application for the registration of a mark or trade-name shall be in English or Spanish, or in the national language, with its corresponding English translation, and signed by the applicant, and shall include: (a) Sworn statement of the applicant's domicile and citizenship, the date of the applicant's first use of the mark or trade-name, the date of the applicant's first use of the mark or trade-name in commerce or business, the goods, business or services in connection with which the mark or trade-name is used and the mode or manner in which the mark is used in connection with such goods, business or services, and that the person making the application believes himself, or the firm, corporation or association on whose behalf he makes the verification, to be the owner of the mark or trade-name sought to be registered, that the mark or trade-name is in use in commerce or business, and that to the best of his knowledge, no person, firm, corporation or association has the right to use such mark or trade-name in commerce or business either in the identical form thereof or in such near resemblance thereto as might be calculated to deceive.