January 2024

Condega Series “F” faces a court-ordered sales halt after Partagás successfully sued for trademark infringement over similar cigar bands, highlighting branding’s critical role in the tobacco industry.

Background of the Case

Established in the 19th century, Partagás has maintained a reputation for quality, tradition, and innovation. Particularly since the 1930s, Partagás has distinguished itself with its “Series” of cigars, which have become synonymous with the brand’s identity.

Among the most notable of these are the “Serie C,” “Serie D,” and the more recent “Serie E.” Each of these series has its own unique blend and character, but they all share a commitment to quality and a distinct presentation style. The “Serie D No. 4,” for example, is famed for its robust flavors and has become a flagship of the brand.

A key element of their identity is the cigar band, a carefully designed and instantly recognizable hallmark. These bands are not merely decorative but are a statement of brand prestige and heritage. They feature intricate designs, the Partagás logo, and a color scheme that denotes the series’ exclusivity.

The consistent quality and branding of these cigars have earned them a loyal following worldwide. Partagás cigars are often at the top of sales rankings, demonstrating their enduring appeal and leading position in the premium cigar market. Their success is a reflection of the brand’s ability to blend traditional cigar-making techniques with an understanding of modern consumer preferences.

Entrance of Condega Series “F”

In a contrasting scenario, the Condega brand, particularly its Series “F,” emerged as a point of contention in this established market. Marketed in Spain by GESINTA INVEST COMPANY, S.L. and La Casa del Tabaco S.L.U., the Condega Series “F” entered the scene with a presentation strikingly similar to that of the Partagás “Series.” This similarity was most apparent in the cigar bands, which are a crucial element of cigar branding and identity.

The Condega Series “F” attempted to carve out its own niche in the premium cigar market. However, the resemblance in the branding elements, especially the cigar bands, to those of the renowned Partagás “Series” did not go unnoticed. This likeness raised questions about the originality and authenticity of the Condega Series “F,” leading to accusations of trademark infringement and unfair competition.

The use of similar branding elements, particularly in a market where presentation and brand identity are paramount, was seen as an encroachment on the established brand value of Partagás. This situation led to a legal challenge, highlighting the importance of brand identity and the fine line between inspiration and infringement in the competitive world of luxury cigars.

The Legal Battle and its Outcome

In November 2018, a significant legal battle unfolded in the cigar industry when Habanos, S.A., the parent company of the esteemed Partagás brand, initiated a lawsuit against GESINTA INVEST COMPANY, S.L. and La Casa del Tabaco S.L.U., the distributors of Condega’s Series “F” in Spain. This legal action marked a pivotal point in the ongoing discourse about brand identity and intellectual property in the premium cigar market.

In response to this legal challenge and as a demonstration of its commitment to distinctiveness and originality in branding, Condega has restyled its cigars, as seen on their official website. The new styling of Condega Series “F” aims to maintain the quality and essence of the cigar while offering a fresh and distinctive look that differentiates it from competitors, particularly addressing the concerns raised in the lawsuit.

The core of Habanos, S.A.’s lawsuit centered around allegations of trademark infringement. The claim was that Condega’s Series “F” had adopted cigar bands strikingly similar to those used by Partagás in their “Series” of cigars. This similarity, according to Habanos, S.A., was not just a matter of aesthetic resemblance but a direct infringement on the trademark rights that Partagás had established over decades. The cigar band, a key element in the branding and marketing of premium cigars, was argued to be an integral part of the Partagás brand identity, protected under intellectual property laws.

The legal proceedings involved a meticulous examination of the cigar bands in question, considering the elements of design, color schemes, and overall presentation. Expert testimonies, market analyses, and historical data on the evolution of the Partagás brand’s identity were likely presented to establish the distinctiveness of their trademark. On the other side, the defense for Condega’s Series “F” would have had to demonstrate that their branding was sufficiently distinct and did not infringe on the Partagás trademark.

After thorough deliberation and legal scrutiny, the court arrived at a decisive verdict. The ruling was clear in its condemnation of the companies behind Condega Series “F,” finding them guilty of unfair competition and infringement of Partagás’s trademark rights. This judgment was significant, as it went beyond a mere acknowledgment of similarity; it legally affirmed the unique identity and trademark rights of the Partagás brand.

The court has mandated a halt in the commercialization of Condega Series “F” cigars that displayed the infringing cigar band. This directive not only impacted the sales and distribution of Condega Series “F” but also served as a stern warning to other entities in the industry about the importance of respecting intellectual property rights.

For Habanos, S.A., and the Partagás brand, this legal victory was more than just a triumph in a court case; it was a reinforcement of their brand’s heritage and its protected status in the market. It underscored the value of their long-standing tradition and the unique identity they had cultivated over the years. For the broader cigar industry, this ruling highlighted the critical nature of brand distinctiveness and the legal repercussions of infringement, setting a precedent for how similar cases might be viewed in the future.

Implications of the Ruling

The implications of this ruling are multifaceted:

Trademark Protection: This decision underscores the importance of trademark rights in the cigar industry. It serves as a precedent for the protection of distinctive brand features, particularly in a market where presentation and brand image play a crucial role.

Market Impact: For Condega, this ruling means reevaluating its branding strategy, especially for its Series “F” line. The decision forces a rebranding or discontinuation of the affected products, potentially impacting Condega’s market presence and consumer perception.

Industry Standards: This case sets a benchmark for how similar cases might be approached in the future, emphasizing the legal boundaries within which companies must operate to ensure fair competition.


In conclusion, the legal battle between Partagás and Condega over trademark infringement marks a pivotal moment in the cigar industry. It underscores the criticality of protecting brand identity and the repercussions of infringement. While challenging Condega to innovate and rebrand, notably with its restyled Serie F, it reaffirms Habanos, S.A.’s commitment to preserving its prestigious Partagás brand. This case sets a precedent in the industry, influencing future branding strategies and highlighting the balance between innovation and respect for established trademarks.

For more information about the restyling, please visit the Condega Cigars website.


Leave a Reply

Latest from News ...

Tabacalera is releasing three new cigars, two limited edition releases for VegaFina and a brand-new...

February 2024

Club Macanudo is building an empire. The almost 30 year old Club Macanudo lounge, one...

February 2024

Tabacalera La Alianza, the Dominican factory where Ernesto Perez-Carrillo crafts his renowned cigars, including two...

February 2024

Cuba has introduced a new size to its Punch cigar line, the Punch Triunfos, a...

February 2024

The Stockholm-based private membership cigar club cigarklubben has send a cease and desist to a...

February 2024