Customs Agency ignores the legal provisions



Despite Verdict No. 249/2006 of the Supreme Court of Cassation (SCC) and Verdict No. 136/2006 of the Commission for the Protection of Competition (CPC), Customs Agency apply again the border control measures by detaining goods as per Unified Administrative Document (UAD) 2005/7-1389 dated 11.07.2006 and more specifically 20 cartons of whiskey of the J&B brand.

By the above cited SCC Verdict it was ascertained that there is no violation of the right over the brand when the good is original. According to Customs Agency the customs bodies did not detain original goods, but it is a fact that despite the already effective SCC Verdict, the CPC Verdict and Verdict No. 9218/2004 of the Supreme Administrative Court (SAC), under which Customs Agency was also a side, such actions were undertaken.

It is not clear why the customs bodies do not wish to comply with the court verdicts, moreover that by the SAC Verdict, under which Customs Agency is a side, it was enacted that “the customs bodies shall not detain goods, even in cases when the owner of the rights of a certain brand has not given his consent to a third party who uses the brand for import into the Republic of Bulgaria. Consequently, in these cases even if there is a violation of the right over the intellectual property, the customs bodies are not obliged to implement the precautions which are stipulated in the regulation."

Generally speaking the Customs Agency not only fails to comply with the abovementioned SAC Verdict, but it also ignores the fact that there is an effective SCC Verdict between the same parties concerning the same brand by which the claims for a violation of the brand right, put in by "Justerini & Brooks" against "BEGEIN" Single Member Ltd. were rejected as unfounded, because the goods are original.