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!
 |
[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 >> TRIGON (Trade Mark: Revocation) [2008] UKIntelP o32808 (15 December 2008) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2008/o32808.html Cite as: [2008] UKIntelP o32808 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
For the whole decision click here: o32808
Result
Section 46(1)(b): Revocation allowed.
Points Of Interest
Summary
In response to the application for revocation the registered proprietor admitted that there had been no use of the mark in suit during the relevant five year period but claimed there were “proper reasons” for non-use of its mark. The reason advanced in its counterstatement was a claim that it had been involved in a joint venture with another firm and that firm had subsequently bought its share of the business. As part of the deal the registered proprietor stated that it had entered into a gentleman’s agreement with the other party not to use the mark in suit for five years. The registered proprietor filed no evidence to substantiate its claim but it did make submissions in a letter in response to a request for summary judgement from the applicant.
The Hearing Officer considered the matter carefully but noted that the registered proprietor had not provided a copy of the agreement referred to, or any surrounding circumstances. Thus it was not possible to consider the agreement as proper reasons for non use of its mark. The registered proprietor also asked the Registrar to exercise his discretion in its favour but the Hearing Officer noted the guidance of the High Court in the case Premier Brands UK Ltd v Typhoon Europe Ltd [2000] FSR 767, that the Registrar has no discretion in revocation cases.
Revocation allowed.
