UFAS: an application should not be rejected if a public procurement participant offered products without trademarks
The participant's application was rejected because, contrary to the terms of the purchase, the furniture trademarks were not indicated in it. The customer referred to the manufacturer's website and noted: the products have registered means of individualization.
The participant explained that he makes the products needed by the customer himself. Marking it with a trademark is a right, not an obligation. He offered products that do not have this sign on them.
Controllers supported the participant:
the application did not specify trademarks for a number of items. However, according to the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the copyright holder of such designations can, and should not, apply them to products. The participant has the right to offer products without these signs;
the customer has not proved that the furniture from the application was registered with trademarks. The application should not have been rejected.
Similar conclusions were reached, in particular, by the St. Petersburg UFAS.
Document: Decision of the Omsk Federal Antimonopoly Service of Russia dated 18.07.2022 N 055/06/48-600/2022