Akhtar, Ayyaz Ahmad Bashir v Martin Grout

Date

24 March 1998

Legislation

Trade Marks Act 1994, s. 92(1)

Keywords

Criminal Offences; appeal

Counsel

Ashley Roughton, Mr M Bennett

Solicitors

David Isaacs Solicitors

Judge

Rose LJ and Sullivan J

Court

Queen's Bench Division

Reported

[1998] 162 JPN 786, [1998] 162 JP 714

Criminal Offences; appeal.

Summary

Appeal by way of case stated from decision of Brent Justices on s.92(1) offences.

Admissibility of the following evidence was raised by the defendant:

1. An opinion of trade mark owners or their agents as to the authenticity of the goods bearing their trade mark.

Decision

The court held that infringement is relevant to confusion, so evidence was rightly heard. Justices assessed the officers' evidence and so did not hear them as experts.

2. Hearsay evidence of the words spoken by the defendant to the officers at the point of sale should only be admissible if it was a confession.