“老万成”老字号商标行政撤销纠纷案
Case Analysis
Wuhan Jianghan District Laowancheng Trading Co., Ltd. v. Wuhan Municipal Administration for Market Regulation et al.
“老万成”老字号商标行政撤销纠纷案
Docket No.: 1040, second instance (终), administrative case (行), (2020) 01, Wuhan Intermediate People's Court of Hubei Province (鄂)
Lower Court Docket No.: 431, first instance (初), administrative case (行), (2019) 0102, the People's Court of Jiang’an District, Wuhan, Hubei Province (鄂)
一审案号：（2019）鄂0102行初431号
二审案号：（2020）鄂01行终1040号
Prefatory Syllabus
裁判要旨
Administrative complaints may form an administrative legal relationship, which should be highly concerned by the administrative authorities. They cannot be replied simply by letter; otherwise they may cause administrative charges against administrative omission.
行政投诉可能形成行政法律关系，应引起行政机关的高度关注，不能简单地以回信方式进行回复，否则可能引起行政不作为的行政指控。
Where the administrative organ does not have a comprehensive understanding of the content of a complaint, resulting in the obvious difference of its specific administrative actions and the content of the administrative complainant's complaint, and the disconnection of the administrative counterpart's complaint request, it is administrative inaction. Where the administrative reconsideration organ knows of an omission in the administrative decision made by the complaining administrative organ but fails to correct it according to law, and rejects the reconsideration application of the applicant, it is administrative inaction that fails to fully perform its reconsideration duties, and the administrative reconsideration decision(s) it has made shall be revoked.
行政机关对某一投诉内容不作全面的理解，导致其作出的具体行政行为与行政投诉人的投诉内容明显不同、与行政相对人的投诉请求不相关联的，属于行政不作为。复议机关明知所诉行政机关作出的行政决定存在遗漏而未依法纠正，作出驳回复议申请人的复议申请的，属未全面履行复议职责的行政不作为，其所作出的行政复议决定应当撤销。
Basic Facts
案情介绍
Plaintiff-Appellee: WUHAN JIANGHAN DISTRICT LAOWANCHENG TRADING CO., LTD.,
Defendants-Appellants: WUHAN MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION FOR MARKET REGULATION,
HUBEI PROVINCIAL ADMINISTRATION FOR MARKET SUPERVISION
Third party: HANKOU LAOWANCHENG FOODS CO., LTD.
上诉人（原审被告）：武汉市市场监督管理局（简称武汉市监局）、湖北省市场监督管理局（简称湖北省监局）
被上诉人（原审原告）：武汉市江汉区老万成商贸有限责任公司（简称老万成商贸公司）
原审第三人：武汉老万成食品有限公司（简称老万成食品公司）
April 16, 2019, Wuhan Jianghan District Laowancheng Trading Co., Ltd. ("Laowancheng Trading") complained in writing to Wuhan Municipal Administration for Market Regulation ("WAMR") that Hankou Laowancheng Foods Co., Ltd. ("Laowancheng Foods") was established later than Laowancheng Trading, but it had used the word "Laowancheng" in its company name. The company had also used the trademark "Laowancheng" held by Laowancheng Trading to produce similar products such as sour plum drink, causing misunderstanding and deception to the public and damaging the legitimate rights and interests of Laowancheng Trading. Laowancheng Trading requested WAMR to correct the registered business name of Laowancheng Foods in accordance with Article 41 of the Measures for the Implementation of Administration of Enterprise Name Registration. After WAMR received the complaint, it checked the original registration files of Laowancheng Trading and Laowancheng Foods, carried out investigations and talks with the two companies respectively, trying to fully understand the enterprise name registration of the parties in dispute, and issued a written Reply on August 16, 2019, which decided that: The review and approval registration procedure of the enterprise name of Laowancheng Foods was legal and in line with the Measures for the Implementation of Administration of Enterprise Name Registration.
2019年4月16日，老万成商贸公司向武汉市监管局书面投诉称：老万成食品公司成立时间晚于老万成商贸公司，但其公司名称中使用“老万成”字样。该公司还使用老万成商贸公司持有的“老万成”商标，生产其同类产品酸梅汤等饮料，对公众造成误解、欺骗，损害了老万成商贸公司的合法权益。老万成商贸公司请求武汉市监局根据《企业名称登记管理实施办法》第四十一条规定，纠正老万成食品公司登记的企业名称。武汉市监局接到投诉后，查阅老万成商贸公司和老万成食品公司的原始登记档案，对两公司分别调查、谈话，全面了解争议双方的企业名称登记情况，于2019年8月16日作出书面《回复》，认定：老万成食品公司企业名称核准登记程序合法，符合《企业名称管理规定》。
Laowancheng Trading refused to accept the decision and filed on August 22, 2019 to Hubei Provincial Administration for Market Supervision ("HAMS") to apply for reconsideration. On December 5, 2019, HAMS made the Administrative Reconsideration Decision No. (2019) 24, which held that WAMR, in its written Reply, did not explain or respond to the question of "whether the production of similar products under the trademark of Hankou Laowancheng should be considered a factor for treating the case as a name dispute" raised by Laowancheng Trading, but had performed its major statutory duties in response to the content of the complaint application, which was to investigate and respond to the issue of whether the registration of Laowancheng Foods had been strictly examined; while the procedural error had not brought material impact on the parties. HAMS accordingly made the reconsideration decision to reject the application for administrative reconsideration.
老万成商贸公司不服，于2019年8月22日向湖北省监局提出复议申请。2019年12月5日，湖北省监局作出（2019）24号行政复议决定书，认为武汉市监局在其书面《回复》中，对老万成商贸公司提出的“打着汉口老万成商标生产同类产品是否作为名称争议处理考虑因素”未进行解释和回应，但针对投诉申请内容履行了主要的法定职责，即对老万成食品公司登记注册时是否进行严格审查的问题进行了调查和回应；程序性错误未对当事人造成实质性的影响。湖北省监局据此作出驳回行政复议申请的复议决定。
Laowancheng Trading refused to accept the decision and filed a lawsuit with the People's Court of Jiang’an District, Wuhan, Hubei Province, requesting that the Reply of WAMR and the administrative reconsideration decision of HAMS be revoked, and that WAMR be ordered to make a new administrative act on the enterprise name dispute complained by Laowancheng Trading. The People's Court of Jiang’an District ruled at first instance that the defendant WAMR was ordered to perform the statutory duty of investigating whether the name of Wuhan Laowancheng Foods had infringed on the name and name right of Laowancheng Trading, and whether it should be ruled as unsuitable business name and be corrected; and that the administrative reconsideration decision made by the defendant HAMS in the case in question was revoked.
老万成商贸公司不服，向湖北省武汉市江岸区人民法院起诉，请求判令撤销武汉市监局的回复和湖北省监局的行政复议决定书，判令武汉市监局对老万成商贸公司投诉的企业名称争议重新作出行政行为。江岸区法院一审判决：责令被告武汉市监局于判决生效之日起六个月内履行对武汉市老万成食品公司名称是否侵犯武汉市江汉区老万成商贸有限责任公司字号及名称权，以及是否应当认定其为不适宜的企业名称予以纠正的问题进行调查处理的法定职责；撤销被告湖北省监局作出的涉案行政复议决定书。
WAMR and HAMS did not accept the first instance judgment and appealed to the Wuhan Intermediate People's Court of Hubei Province ("Wuhan Intermediate Court").
武汉市监局和湖北省监局不服一审判决，向湖北省武汉市中人民法院提出上诉。
Wuhan Intermediate People's Court found in the second instance that WAMR, in its administrative reconsideration process, had only reviewed whether the enterprise name registration of Laowancheng Foods was legal, before it made the determination that the name registration procedure was legal, but avoided the complaint request of Laowancheng Trading about whether "the already registered enterprise name is an inappropriate name and should be corrected", which, in fact, had not investigated what was complained, so WAMR's investigation and handling of dealing with the administrative complaint should be considered as administrative inaction. HAMS, in the process of its administrative reconsideration, had failed to act administratively and correct according to law about the complaint request for investigation and handling in the process of specific administrative actions of WAMR, and the existence of substantive issues and procedural issues in the administrative decision of WAMR had not been corrected timely, so it was an administrative act not fully performing the reconsideration duties. Therefore, the Wuhan Intermediate People's Court ruled in the second instance to dismiss the appeal and upheld the original judgment.
武汉市中院二审认定，武汉市监局在其行政审查过程中，仅审查老万成食品公司注册登记时的企业名称登记是否合法，便作出了其名称登记程序合法的认定，而回避了老万成商贸公司“已经登记注册企业名称是否属于不适宜的企业名称及应否应予纠正”的投诉请求，实际上是“查非所诉，诉而不查”，故武汉市监局对该项行政投诉的查处行为应认定为行政上的不作为。湖北省监局在行政复议过程中，对武汉市监局在具体行政行为实施过程中存在对要求查处的投诉请求未予查处的行政不作为，未依法纠正，且对武汉市监局作出的行政决定中存在的实体问题和程序问题未及时纠正，属未全面履行复议职责的行政行为。综上，武汉中院二审判决：驳回上诉，维持原判。
Typical Significance
典型意义
Subjects with relative administrative legal relations raise problems in the form of complaint letters, requesting investigation and handling, which is appealable. The administrative organs should have made the administrative reconsideration decisions in accordance with the law instead of simply responding to the petition letters. This case is exemplary to correct the administrative malpractice of administrative organs in not acting on petition cases and to guide the administrative organs to administer according to law.
具有相对行政法律关系的主体以投诉信的方式反映问题、请求查处，具有可诉性。行政机关应该依法作出行政审查决定，而不是仅对信访信件简单回复。本案有利于纠正行政机关对信访案件不作为的行政弊端，指导行政机关依法行政。
"Laowancheng" is a century-old brand and a high-profile trademark with wide public awareness. Within the same competitive market, the historic brand name was registered by another company as the latter's business name, and the right holder disputed the inappropriate business name registered by the offender. It could request the supervisory authority of business name registration to carry out administrative investigation and handling, but also defend its rights through judicial proceedings. The administrative organs could directly correct the inappropriate enterprise name after having the facts checked, in which case, it could have saved the social resources and achieved the obvious protection effect with less effort. In this case, the court ordered the administrative organs to take administrative treatment actions within a period of time, providing an example of protection in solving the legal conflicts between enterprise names and historic brand names.
“老万成”是百年老字号，也是具有较高知名度的商标。在同一竞争市场内，老字号被他人当作企业名称进行注册，权利人对加害人注册的不适宜的企业名称争议，既可以请求企业名称注册监管机关进行政查处，也可以通过司法诉讼进行维权。行政机关查清事实后直接纠正不适宜的企业名称，可以节省社会资源、起到事半功倍的明显保护效果。本案中，法院责令行政机关限期作出行政处理行为，为解决企业名称和老字号之间的法律冲突提供了保护实例。
英文投稿及市场合作：
jane.jiang@chinaipmagazine.com
18911449529（微信同号）
往期推荐