FRUIT OF THE LOOM, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS and GENERAL GARMENTS CORPORATION. G.R. No. L-32747. November 29, 1984

FACTS:

Petitioner is a corporation who owns the trademark Fruit of the Loom wherein the business is the selling of underwear.

Respondent is a domestic corporation who owns the trademark Fruit for Eve whose business is similar to petitioners.

Petitioner filed before the lower a complaint for trademark infringement and unfair competition against respondent citing that their names and hang tags are confusingly similar and is a colorable imitation.

The trial court held in favor of petitioner. Respondent then appealed to the CA wherein the decision was reversed. The CA held that the word Fruit is a generic word, thus is not capable of exclusive appropriation and that petitioner is not entitled to the exclusive use of every word in their trademark.

ISSUE: Whether there is trademark infringement.

RULING:

No. The SC stated that the there is no confusing similarity which would deceive buyers. The SC declared that the word Fruit in both goods is not enough to show that buyers will get confused over such. It was not the dominant feature of both products.

In relation to the hang tags, the SC did find similarities but the differences were more glaring and striking, The similarities of the competing trademarks in this case are completely lost in the substantial differences in the design and general appearance of their respective hang tags