Source: http://arbitration-poland.com/case-law/432,warsaw_appellate_court_judgment_dated_16_april_200_07_.html
Timestamp: 2020-03-28 18:33:10
Document Index: 72863445

Matched Legal Cases: ['art. 1184', '§ 2', 'art. 1206', '§ 1', 'art. 1206', '§ 2']

arbitration-poland.com - Case Law - Warsaw Appellate Court judgment dated 16 April 2008 (Case No. I ACa 1334/07)
id : 20335
art. 1184 § 2 CPC (from 1.7.2009), art. 1206 § 1 CPC (from 1.7.2009), art. 1206 § 2 CPC (from 1.7.2009)
dated 16 April 2008
(Case No. I ACa 1334/07)
In 2005 “E.-n.” sp. z o.o. brought an arbitration proceeding before the Internet Domains Arbitration Court at the Polish Chamber of Information Technology and Telecommunications against R.F., sole proprietor of an Internet business selling home appliances and electronics, alleging trademark infringement and unfair competition. In 2006 the arbitration court issued an award denying the claim. The claimant filed a petition with the regional court to set aside the award, alleging that the arbitration court had violated the arbitration rules and that the award violated public policy. The regional court denied the petition.
The claimant alleged that the arbitration court had violated the adversary principle by performing its own Google search of the key terms in dispute (“euro” and “rtv”), and reviewing the parties’ websites, before the hearing began and without being requested to do so by the parties. The arbitrators subsequently informed the parties, and they did not object. The claimant also alleged that the award violated public policy by denying trademark protection on the Internet.
The appellate court denied the appeal, finding that the alleged procedural violations did not have a material impact on the decision and that the arbitration court did not deny the claimant trademark protection but merely found that there was little risk of confusion when the claimant traded mainly in brick-and-mortar stores while the respondent traded solely on the Internet.