[Trademark/Management of Affairs without Mandate] 2018 (Ne) 10074 <Takabe>
更新日：2 日前
Article information
Article type: Case note
Category: Trademarks, Patents
Topics: Damages
First published on this website: 2026-11-01
Display and classification checked: November 2, 2026
Originally published on Ameblo: 2025-05-07 (Japan time). Full English translation.
[Trademark/Management of Affairs without Mandate] 2018 (Ne) 10074 <Takabe>
The request for procedures to register transfer of the trademark rights acquired by the appellee was rejected, whether as restitution following rescission of the business-transfer agreement or as management of affairs without mandate.
1. Restitution Obligation upon Rescission of the Business-Transfer Agreement
The appellee independently applied for the trademark registration; it was not an object of the business-transfer agreement and is not subject to restitution.
2. Transfer of Rights Based on Management of Affairs without Mandate
The appellee's conduct cannot be evaluated as managing affairs for the appellant.
3. Trademark Similarity and the Availability of Remedies
Other trademark rights and remedies (claims for damages and requests for invalidation trials) exist.
4. Fairness and the Purpose of the Trademark Act
Because the Trademark Act adopts a registration-based system apart from exceptions such as usurped applications, a transfer claim without a legal basis cannot be allowed.
Update history
The first-published date remains unchanged. Display maintenance, classification changes, related-article updates, and text corrections are recorded separately.
November 1, 2026: First published on this website.
November 2, 2026: Added article information, classification, topics, language navigation, related articles where the same case was confirmed, consultation guidance, and SEO. The original text and first-published date were preserved.
