Restoring a French trade mark registration (Art. L.712-10) (11-1997) A trade mark has not been renewed in due course. According to Art. L.712-10 of the Code   of Intellectual   Property, "an applicant who   has not complied with the time limits referred to in Articles L.712-2 and L.712-9 (Renewal), but is able to prove the failure to comply was due neither to own will nor to fault or negligence on his part, may, subject to the conditions laid down by decree in Council of State, be reinstated in the rights he has lost." The titular will have to prove that he was unable to attend to the renewal in due time. He may put forward one of the following reasons : medical or personal grounds : illness (a medical certificate is required, covering the period from the due date for the renewal - or before - to now - in fact, it is possible to ask for the reinstatement in the lost rights 2 months after the discontinuance of the impediment, but within six months after the due date) ; death of a closely related person : husband, wife, child, parent, having disturbed the titular of the trademark (a medical certificate is required, together with a certificate of death of the closely related person) ; professional and financial difficulties : unemployment (proofs are also required) ; if the titular is the managing director of a company : broad difficulties under unusual circumstances (proofs are also required, such as a certificate of the auditor) ; error made by the representative or the attorney (a certificate signed by the representative or by the attorney indicating that he has forgotten to send the instructions to the French agent is required, together with a copy of a letter of the client bearing a date before the due date for the renewal, giving him his instructions). According to the jurisprudence : the fault of the attorney or representative is a good reason, the attorney or the representative being a qualified one, which shows that the titular had the will to renew the trademark in due course. (There is a jurisprudence in the patent field according to which the representative was an employee ; the well-founded excuse was recognized, however the professional qualification of the employee in the patent field was recognized and there was a clerical error in a payment order given to the company paying the annual fees.) ; the illness of the titular (or of a related person justifying the presence of the titular) is a well-founded reason ; however, a sufficiently serious character of the illness is needed ; the absence for a business trip is not a well-founded excuse. In most jurisprudence cases, it is the fault of the qualified attorney which is put forward. Please also note that a foreign titular cannot invoke Art. 5bis of the Paris Convention.