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 of judicial review.
Held: The action was pending at the time of the new Act within Schedule 3. Section 78 gave wide powers to make rules, and those were not limited to merely procedural issues. The change in the rules would affect substantive rights, and a statute was not to be applied retrospectively unless it was clearly intended to do so.
 EWHC Admin 165
Trade Marks Act 1994 Sch 3 par10(1)
England and Wales
Cited – Interlego AG’s Trade Mark Applications 1998
Cited – Yew Bon Tew v Kenderaan Bas Mara PC 7-Oct-1982
(Malaysia) In 1972 the appellants were injured by the respondent’s bus. At that time the local limitation period was 12 months. In 1974 the limitation period became three years. The appellants issued a writ in 1975. To succeed they would have to sue . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 07 March 2021; Ref: scu.139429