February 19, 2010 – The Arbitration Court of the Republic of Adygeya decided to bring an individual entrepreneur to administrative responsibility in accordance with art. 14.10 of the Russian Administrative Offences Code for importation, without the permission of the right holder, Sojuzpatent’s client Company "Ferrero S.p.A.", into the territory of the Russian Federation of confections, which labels and packages contained signs identical or confusingly similar to the trademark of the right holder. With regard to the same case the Arbitration Court of the Republic of Adygeya also decided to impose on the offender an administrative fine in the amount of 11,000 (eleven thousand) rubles and to confiscate the subjects of administrative offence: the chocolate products of a spherical shape with ‘surprise’ designation on them. This case on an administrative offense was considered by the Court on the basis of the Novorossiysk customs’ application. Company "Ferrero S.p.A." participated in the case as a third party not instituting independent claims.

19 February 2010
February 19, 2010 – The Arbitration Court of the Republic of Adygeya decided to bring an individual entrepreneur to administrative responsibility in accordance with art. 14.10 of the Russian Administrative Offences Code for importation, without the permission of the right holder, Sojuzpatent’s client Company "Ferrero S.p.A.", into the territory of the Russian Federation of confections, which labels and packages contained signs identical or confusingly similar to the trademark of the right holder. With regard to the same case the Arbitration Court of the Republic of Adygeya also decided to impose on the offender an administrative fine in the amount of 11,000 (eleven thousand) rubles and to confiscate the subjects of administrative offence: the chocolate products of a spherical shape with ‘surprise’ designation on them. This case on an administrative offense was considered by the Court on the basis of the Novorossiysk customs’ application. Company "Ferrero S.p.A." participated in the case as a third party not instituting independent claims.