Complaint was made that the defendants were assisting traders in Ecuador in passing off their products as those of the plaintiff.
Held: ‘He [defence counsel] submitted that there can never be a tort where the English exporter exports nothing but the malt whisky, that being something which is susceptible of being used innocently in the foreign country. It seems to me that Mr Cochrane’s submission cannot be correct. Suppose, for example, a case where the English exporter has told the foreign importer exactly how to set up deceptive sales of the admixture. It cannot be the law that the English exporter will escape liability simply because he does nothing except export the Scotch Whisky. If he exports it with the intention that the admixture shall be sold in a deceptive manner, it is immaterial that he has been responsible neither for the printing and production of the deceptive labels and cartons, nor for their actual implication in the sale of the liquor in the foreign country. In that state of affairs the whisky, being intended to facilitate the deceptive sales, is itself, if you like, an inchoate instrument of deception.’
Judges:
Nourse J
Citations:
[1984] RPC 61
Citing:
Cited – John Walker and Sons Ltd v Henry Ost and Co Ltd ChD 1970
The plaintiff whisky distiller claimed in passing-off against the defendant who supplied bottles and labels to a distiller in Ecuador.
Held: An injunction was granted. Having cited from Singer v Loog, the court added: ‘I would be slow to . .
Cited by:
Cited – British Telecommunications Plc; Virgin Enterprises Ltd; J Sainsbury Plc; Marks and Spencer Plc and Ladbroke Group Plc v One In a Million Ltd and others CA 23-Jul-1998
Registration of a distinctive Internet domain name using registered trade marks and company names could be an infringement of a registered Trade Mark, and also passing off. It was proper to grant quia timet injunctions where necessary to stop . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Intellectual Property
Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.239091