The appellant had sought to register as a trade mark the shape of a polo mint. The objector said it lacked sufficient distinctive character. The appellant sought to amend the specification of the trade mark to limit its application as to the goods to which it would be applied, and the dimensions and colour.
Held: The specification could not be amended. Such an amendment did not fall within section 13(1), since the requirement sought to be altered did not limit the ‘rights conferred by the registration’. The appellant must instead commence a new registration application with the new specification.
Judges:
Lord Justice Chadwick, Lord Justice Mummery, Master Of The Rolls Lord Phillips Of Worth Matravers, Mr
Citations:
[2004] EWCA Civ 1008, Times 04-Aug-2004
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Robert McBride Ltd’s Trade Mark Application TMR 2003
The applicant sought to amend its application for a trade mark. The Appointed Person refused the application, emphasising that an applicant must specify his claim from the start. Geoffrey Hobbs QC said: ‘Amendment of a trade mark after registration . .
Cited by:
Reference from – Nestle v Mars UK Ltd (Approximation Of Laws) ECJ 7-Jul-2005
Europa Trade marks – Directive 89/104/EEC – Absence of distinctive character – Distinctive character acquired through use – Use as part of or in conjunction with a registered trade mark.
‘An applicant who . .
Cited – L’Oreal Sa and others v Bellure NV and others ChD 4-Oct-2006
The claimant alleged that the defendants had been importing copies of their perfumes. The products were not counterfeits, but ‘smell-alikes’. The defendants’ packaging and naming was used to suggest which perfume it resembled.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Intellectual Property
Updated: 17 October 2022; Ref: scu.199574
