OREANDA-NEWS  On 20 February was announced, that the Federal Arbitration Court of the Moscow District upheld the rulings of the 9th Arbitration Appeal Court of 22nd October 2008 and the Moscow Arbitration Court of 17th July 2008, that confirmed validity of the decision of the Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS Russia) on refusing to initiate proceedings upon a petition of "KAMAZ" OJSC about "SpetsTrans" Ltd.

In its petition to the Antimonopoly Service, "KAMAZ" OJSC stated that "SpetsTrans" Ltd. was illegally using the "KAMAZ" trademark, owned by "KAMAZ" OJSC, in advertising the company's activities.

FAS Russia analyzed the advertisement and concluded that the "KAMAZ" trademark was clearly used to indicate the products repaired by the advertised organization - "SpetsTrans" Ltd. The advertisement did not say that the trademark belonged to "SpetsTrans" Ltd.

According to No.14685/03 Resolution the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation of 6th April 2004 on No.а76-9599/02-46-442/33-94 case, the rights holder cannot ban the use of the trademarks by the third parties for the goods that have been introduced in civil circulation in the Russian Federation directly by the rights holder or under his consent; therefore, other persons/ entities can use the trademark in advertising of their commercial, service or other activities involving the goods lawfully introduced in civil circulation, if it does not violate the advertising legislation.

FAS Russia concluded that "SpetsTrans" Ltd. had the right to use the "KAMAZ" name in advertising of its activities for repair of motor vehicles, including "KAMAZ" motor vehicles, to indicate the products that can be repaired by "SpetsTrans" Ltd. using the spare parts under the"KAMAZ" trademark, "SpetsTrans" Ltd. did not indicate that the products were owned by the company. FAS Russia dismissed the petition of "KAMAZ" OJSC and did not initiate proceedings against "SpetsTrans" Ltd.

"KAMAZ" OJSC disagreed with the decision of the Antimonopoly Service and filed a lawsuit. The Court, however, sided with FAS Russia.