A case had been referred to the court as to the interpetation of the articles in the Directive. The court replied asking whether the subsequent Ansul judgement answered the questions raised. Held: By agreement with the parties, only one of the questions was answered, and four remained. The court requested the European court to continue. … Continue reading Re Trade Marks Act 1994 Trade Marks Nos 1338514 (in Class 5) and 1402537 (in Class 3) in the name of Laboratories Goemar SA and Applications for Revocation thereof Nos 10073 and 10074 by La Mer Technology Inc: ChD 20 Jun 2003

An action was begun opposing a trade mark. It was conducted under the old rules, which did not allow for an order for discovery. After the new rules came into effect, discovery was sought, but the registrar said the old rules would continue to apply within the case. That decision was now challenged by way … Continue reading Regina v Register of Trade Marks ex parte Interturbine Germany Gmbh: Admn 22 Feb 1999

The claimants sought to prevent the respondents from starting an evening newspaper entitled ‘THE MAIL’ as an infringement of their registered mark, and as passing off. In turn the defendant challenged the validity of the mark. Held: The word ‘Mail’ has not acquired a descriptive meaning, and nor is there any requirement in the law … Continue reading Associated Newspapers Limited, Daily Mail and General Trust Plc v Express Newspapers (an Unlimited Company, Incorrectly Sued As Express Newspapers Limited): ChD 11 Jun 2003

The Asprey family had been in business for many years. Their business was incorporated, and later sold to the claimants. A member of the Asprey family sought to carry on new businesses through limited companies using the family name. Upon request, he changed the names to the names of the respondent companies. Later he left … Continue reading Asprey and Garrard Ltd v WRA (Guns) Ltd and Another: CA 11 Oct 2001

The claimant alleged infringement of his registered trade marks ‘Money Saving Expert’ and associated terms. The defendant operated a service trading as ‘Money Claiming Expert’. Both services included advising those who might wish to claim refunds from banks. The claimant sought summary judgment. Held: The defence as filed proposed no real defence,merely putting the claimant … Continue reading Lewis v Client Connection Ltd: ChD 6 Jul 2011

Proof of an infringement under Section 10(3) does require proof that the use was such as was likely to cause confusion. Citations: [1997] FSR 22 Statutes: Trade Marks Act 1994 810(1) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Marks and Spencer Plc, Ladbrokes Plc, J Sainsbury Plc, Virgin Enterprises Ltd, British Telecommunications Plc, Telecom … Continue reading Baywatch Production Co Inc v Home Video Channel: 1997

The claimant sought to restrain the defendants from using the name ‘Bell Atlantic’ so as to cause confusion and a passing of the defendant had registered Internet domain names and sought to register trade marks similar to those of the claimants. The . .