BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?

No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £5, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!



BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions >> STARBRITE (Trade Mark: Invalidity) [1998] UKIntelP o06498 (13 March 1998)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/1998/o06498.html
Cite as: [1998] UKIntelP o6498, [1998] UKIntelP o06498

[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]


STARBRITE (Trade Mark: Invalidity) [1998] UKIntelP o06498 (13 March 1998)

For the whole decision click here: o06498

Trade mark decision

BL Number
O/064/98
Decision date
13 March 1998
Hearing officer
Mr M Reynolds
Mark
STARBRITE
Classes
26
Applicant for Invalidity
T D Reid (Braids) Limited
Registered Proprietor
Elastex Ltd
Invalidity
Sections 47 & 3(6)

Result

Sections 47 & 3(6) - Invalidity action successful

Points Of Interest

Summary

The applicants for invalidity claimed that the mark STARBRITE had been used as an unregistered mark by the firm, Archibald Turner & Co for several years before it went into liquidation in 1992. At that time the mark and other assets had been acquired from the Liquidators of Archibald Turner & Co by the applicants and they claimed to have used it from that date onwards. Thus they said, they owned the mark and rights and goodwill in the mark and the mark had been registered in bad faith by the registered proprietor.

The registered proprietor had not filed a counterstatement or evidence to rebut the claims made by the applicants but their attorneys of record filed a letter to confirm that the registered proprietor had been dissolved and appeared to have no further interest in the mark.

The Hearing Officer noted that there were some gaps in the applicant's evidence but taking an overall view of the situation and the absence of any rebuttal by the registered proprietor, he found that the mark had been registered contrary to Section 3(6) of the Act.



BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/1998/o06498.html