Jolliville, Jollibee ‘not confusingly similar’, Ipophl rules

Fastfood giant Jollibee Foods Corp. lost a years-long trademark case against Ting-led Jolliville Holdings Corp. after the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL) decided that the corporate names of both companies were “not confusingly similar,” a copy of the decision showed.

In the IPOPHL decision dated June 8, IPOPHL Director General Josephine Santiago reversed the 2014 decision of the agency’s bureau of legal affairs and granted Jolliville’s appeal for the registration of its corporate name.

The issue began in January 2013 when Jollibee filed a notice of opposition against the application of publicly listed firm Jolliville Holdings Corp. for the registration of its corporate name and logo “Jolliville.”

The IPOPHL Bureau of Legal Affairs ruled in favor of the popular fastfood chain in September 2014, forcing Jolliville to file a complaint.

“The decision of the BLA director [in September 2014] is incorrect and the appeal is meritorious. The appellant’s [Jolliville] mark is not confusingly similar to appellee’s [Jollibee] marks,” the decision read.

“In the absence of the likelihood of confusion between the Jolliville and the appellee’s (Jollibee) registered trademarks, there is no ground to prohibit the registration of Jolliville in the name of the appellant,” the document said.

In its appeal in 2014, Jolliville said the use of “Jolli” is a tribute to its founder Jolly L. Ting and that Jollibee cannot claim exclusive and immediate association of “Jolli” or “Jolly,” explaining that there were several other registered corporations and trademarks that use the same name.

“The appellant has proven its ownership and continuous use of Jolliville since 1986. It has secured trademark registration for Jolliville as early as 2004,” IPOPHL added.

“While appellee (Jollibee) was making it big in the food service business, so was Mr. Jolly L. Ting in the night entertainment business. As the owner of a string of night entertainment establishments such as Pegasus, Discovery, Mega Heartbeat, Lexus, he earned the moniker king of night entertainment,” IPOPHL said.

Ting later diversified into real estate property management and development.

IPOPHL also said Jollibee did not present any proof that its interests over its registered marks have been damaged or were likely to be damaged by the registration of Jolliville.

“The registration of Jolliville in favor of the appellant is not contrary to the provisions of the IP Code but is consistent to the very essence of granting trademark registration,” IPOPHL said.

Ting started in the night club business, then branched out into real estate venture with Jolliville Realty and Development Co. Inc. (JRDCI) in September 1986. The SEC approved the change in name of JRDCI to Jolliville Holdings Corp. in April 1999.

Jolliville and its subsidiaries are now engaged in leasing, management services, property development, land banking, local waterworks system, business process outsourcing and power generation.