
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


A trade mark owner registered and – for a time – used a slogan.
After it stopped using the slogan, another party sought the owner’s consent to register it as a trade mark, threatening deregistration for non-use if consent was not provided. The owner consented.
The other party became the new owner of the mark and the owner cancelled its own registration: [6].
Following this – surprisingly – the new owner sued the former owner for trade mark infringement in relation to the slogan.
A person does not infringe another’s trade mark if the person exercises a right granted by the Trade Marks Act i.e. the rights the former owner had while it was the owner: s122(1)(e) of the TMA.
The Court found, with little difficulty, that the former owner was entitled to use the mark in the period in which it owned it: [20]. The document the new owner used to sue was struck out for being "embarrassing" in the legal sense.
The Court made orders setting out a regime allowing the new owner to propose a new document. In coming to its decision the Court noted the suggestion that expungement of a trade mark is not retrospective: [16].
So, if you’re the owner of a trade mark, you’re allowed to do the things that owners do!
By James d'Apice5
22 ratings
A trade mark owner registered and – for a time – used a slogan.
After it stopped using the slogan, another party sought the owner’s consent to register it as a trade mark, threatening deregistration for non-use if consent was not provided. The owner consented.
The other party became the new owner of the mark and the owner cancelled its own registration: [6].
Following this – surprisingly – the new owner sued the former owner for trade mark infringement in relation to the slogan.
A person does not infringe another’s trade mark if the person exercises a right granted by the Trade Marks Act i.e. the rights the former owner had while it was the owner: s122(1)(e) of the TMA.
The Court found, with little difficulty, that the former owner was entitled to use the mark in the period in which it owned it: [20]. The document the new owner used to sue was struck out for being "embarrassing" in the legal sense.
The Court made orders setting out a regime allowing the new owner to propose a new document. In coming to its decision the Court noted the suggestion that expungement of a trade mark is not retrospective: [16].
So, if you’re the owner of a trade mark, you’re allowed to do the things that owners do!

25 Listeners

1,120 Listeners

848 Listeners

791 Listeners

26 Listeners

88 Listeners

320 Listeners

815 Listeners

173 Listeners

251 Listeners

48 Listeners

7 Listeners

11 Listeners

19 Listeners

275 Listeners