7/28/2019 Ch. 1_LYCEUM OF THE PHILIPPINES V.docx

1/2

LYCEUM OF THE PHILIPPINES V.

LYCEUM OF APARRI, CABAGAN, CAMALANIUGAN, LALLO, TUAO, BUHI, CATANDUANES, SOUTHERN

PHILIPPINES, EASTERN MINDANAO, & WESTERN PANGASINAN

Facts:

Lyceum PH is an educational institution registered with SEC on Sep 21 1950. On Feb 23 1984,Lyceum PH instituted proceedings with SEC to compel the respondents to delete the word

Lyceum from their corporate names.

The table shows the participation of the respondents and SEC registration date:

Actively participated in the SEC proceedings

Western Pangasinan Lyceum Oct 27 1950

Lyceum of Cabagan Oct 31 1962

Lyceum of Lallo March 26 1972

Lyceum of Aparri March 28 1972Lyceum of Tuao March 28 1972

Lyceum of Camalaniugan March 28 1972

Declared in default (did not participate)

Buhi Lyceum Central Lyceum of Catanduanes

Lyceum of Eastern Mindanao Lyceum of Southern PH

Lyceum PH earlier filed the same proceeding against Lyceum Baguio. SEC Hearing Officer (Asso.Commissioner) held that the corporate names were identical in that the geographic location was

the only distinguishing factor, and that Lyceum PH registered its corp name ahead of Baguio. It

ordered Baguio to change its corp name. Baguio appealed to SC but was denied. Lyceum wrote all other educational institutions using Lyceum to drop it from their corp name.

When it failed, Lyceum filed the case with SEC claiming its proprietary right to the word

Lyceum. The SEC Hearing Officer relied on the ruling in the Baguio case and ordered them to

change their corp name.

Upon appeal to SEC En Banc, it reversed the decision. It did not consider the word Lyceum tohave become so identified with Lyceum PH as to render the use of it by other institutions to

cause confusion. SEC En Banc held that attaching the geographical location served to

sufficiently distinguish the schools from one another, especially since the campus locations were

physically remote from each other.

Lyceum PH appealed to CA. CA affirmed SEC EBs order. Lyceum PH appealed to SC.Issue:

(1) WON use of the word Lyceum as part of the corp name of the respondents cause confusion(2) WON Lyceum as a generic word can be appropriated by Lyceum PH to the exclusion of others

Held:

7/28/2019 Ch. 1_LYCEUM OF THE PHILIPPINES V.docx

2/2

(1) NO. Sec 18 Corp Code provides that No corp name may be allowed by the SEC if theproposed name is identical/deceptively/confusingly similar to that of any existing corporation,

or to any other name already protected by law, or is patently deceptive, confusing or contrary to

existing laws.

o The purpose is to avoid fraud upon the public, evasion of legal obligations and duties,and reduction of difficulties of administration and supervision over corporations.

o Court held that the names are not identical, confusing or deceptive. Any confusion isprecluded by the appending of the geographical location.

(2) NO. Lyceum, which is originally a Greek word (Lykeion) referring to a locality on the riverIllisius, is now as generic as the word university. It is used to denote a secondary school or

college.

o The doctrine ofsecondary meaning originated in the field of trademark law, and is nowapplicable to corporate names. This refers to a word or phrase referring to an article on

the market, which was originally incapable of exclusive appropriation, but because it has

been used so long and so exclusively by one producer with reference to his article, it has

now come to mean (in trade and by the public) that the word/phrase was his product.

o Court held the use of the word Lyceum by PH did not acquire secondary meaning.Lyceum PH has only proven that it has used said word as its corp name for a long time

but that does not automatically give it secondary meaning. For one, Pangasinan Lyceum

has also been using the word for 17 years prior to Lyceum PHs registration and the

Roman Catholic Church has also used said word to name its schools (e.g.,. Liceo de

Manila). Second, the fact that there are several institutions using the word Lyceum

shows that Lyceum PH has not yet acquired exclusivity over the word.

o Court stated that to determine whether a given corp name is identical ordeceptively/confusingly similar with another entitys corporate name, it is not enough to

ascertain the presence of Lyceum in both names. One must evaluate the corp names

in their entirety.

Petition is denied. CA decision affirmed.