| Source: | All England Reporter |
| Publisher Citation: | [2005] All ER (D) 346 (Jun) |
| Neutral Citation: | [2005] EWHC 1353 (Ch) |
| Court: | Chancery Division |
| Judge: | Christopher Floyd QC sitting as a deputy judge of High Court |
| Representation | Roger Wyand QC (instructed by Stringer Saul LLP) for the company. |
| Michael Tappin (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the respondent. | |
| Judgment Dates: | 29 June 2005 |
Catchwords
Trade marks - Registration - Distinctiveness of marks proposed - Hearing officer's determination that marks devoid of distinctive character - Correctness of decision.
The Case
As the court could find no trace of error in the hearing officer's decision on inherent distinctiveness, it upheld his decision that both trade marks applied for by the appellant fencing manufacturer were inherently devoid of distinctive character and that its evidence of use had not persuaded him that the marks had acquired that character by use.
Practice Areas
If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.
Lexis®Library
- An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary
