The opponent marketed baby food using the trade mark. The applicant sough revocation of the trade mark on the grounds of it not having been bona-fide used.
Held: The Electrolux case did not establish that the mark owner had to establish commercial use on a substantial scale in addition to bona fide use. Section 26(1) of the 1938 Act continued to apply to this matter. A test marketing of 1200 jars of baby food was a bona fide use, and was sufficient to defend the mark.
Judges:
The Vice-Chancellor
Citations:
Gazette 25-Apr-2002, [2002] EWHC 428 (Ch)
Links:
Statutes:
Trade Marks Act 1938 26(1), Trade Marks Act 1994 Sch 3 para 17(1)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Electrolux Ltd v Electrix Ltd 1954
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Intellectual Property
Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.170002