I – Case Summary

This is a case review of Decision No. 014/24/OAPI/CSR of June 06, 2024, issued by the OAPI Higher Commission of Appeals. The matter concerns a dispute between Sanjay Trading Co. LLC and CAPRACI (Compagnie Africaine de Produits Alimentaires en Côte d’Ivoire) regarding the trademark “OUI MAMAN + Logo” (No. 117765), registered by Sanjay Trading Co. LLC, and the prior trademark “MAMAN + Logo” (No. 41463), held by the opponent, CAPRACI.

II – Facts

CAPRACI filed an opposition with the Director General of OAPI against the registration of Sanjay Trading’s trademark. The opposition was based on CAPRACI’s prior registered rights and the assertion that the marks were confusingly similar.

III – Procedural History

The Director General of OAPI initially rejected the opposition. The rejection was grounded in the following:

• Phonetic Analysis: The contested mark consists of three syllables, whereas the opponent’s mark consists of two.
• Visual Analysis: The graphic elements were deemed sufficiently distinct for an average consumer to distinguish between them.
• Conclusion: The Director General ruled that these differences outweighed the similarities and, when viewed as a whole, eliminated any likelihood of confusion.

IV – Issue

The opponent appealed this decision to the Higher Commission of Appeals. They argued that the Director General’s ruling undermined a fundamental principle of trademark law: that the analysis of the risk of confusion must focus on similarities rather than differences.

V – Rule of Law

The appellant maintained it is settled law that an examiner must evaluate the overall impression created by visual, phonetic, and conceptual similarities. By performing a meticulous analysis of minute differences—which an average consumer does not do, as they rarely view both marks simultaneously—the Director General’s decision was rendered legally flawed (tainted with nullity).

Consequently, the Director General erred by determining the case based on the differences between the conflicting marks rather than their commonalities and the resulting overall impression.

VI – Holding

The Commission held that the Director General of OAPI erred in finding an absence of confusion. Accordingly, the Commission annulled Decision No. 1457/OAPI/DG/DGA/DAJ/SCG of December 15, 2022, and ordered the cancellation of the trademark “OUI MAMAN + Logo” (No. 117765).

VII – Reasoning

The Higher Commission of Appeals based its annulment on the following grounds:

• Product Similarity: The conflicting marks are registered for identical or similar products within International Classes 29, 30, 31, and 32, specifically food products.
• Likelihood of Confusion: Due to visual and conceptual similarities, minute differences do not prevent a consumer from perceiving the marks as originating from the same or economically linked entities.
• The Similarity Principle: In trademark law, signs must be compared based on their similarities. The Commission noted that the Director General focused improperly on differences.
• Mischaracterization of Elements: The Commission observed that the respondent, Sanjay Trading Co. LLC, attempted to highlight differences by denying shared graphic elements—such as the ears of barley, rice, or wheat—even attempting to characterize them as ostrich feathers in their own mark to avoid similarity.

Dayspring Law Firm is an OAPI licensed intellectual property agent/attorney with a rich experience in defending trademark holders within the OAPI space against all sorts of counterfeiting. To know more about our trademark anti-counterfeiting services please click here.