Trade mark decision

BL Number
Decision date
10 May 2000
Hearing Officer
Mr S P Rowan
Aberdeen Trust Plc
Ueberseebank AG
Sections 3(6); 5(1); 5(2)(a); 5(2)(b) 5(4)(a) & 5(4)(b)


Opposition proceedings to continue.

Points Of Interest

  • None


Assignment of the application from the original applicant (Company A) to another company of the same name was deemed a nullity, since Company A was dissolved prior to the date of assignment, with the result that any property (including rights in the application) not sold by the liquidator became vested in the Crown bona vacantia. By a direction under Rule 60, the application reverted, in name, to Company A.

Since he had no information before him as to whether the rights in the application had indeed been sold prior to dissolution of Company A, and since in the absence of a sale the Crown could assign those rights to a third party, the Hearing Officer refused to deem the application withdrawn. In so deciding, he took the view that there was no lack of an intention to use (by the Crown) at the date of the application, and therefore no fatal infringement of Section 32(3).

In the circumstances, the Hearing Officer instructed the Registry to write to Company A’s solicitors, the liquidators and the solicitors for the Crown, requiring notice within one month from the owner of the rights in the application of intention to defend the application, at the expiry of which the opposition proceedings should continue. Subject to due assignment, any third party would then have a right to be heard.

The Hearing Officer further determined that a witness who had provided evidence for the opponent under Rule 13(3), and who was not a party to the proceedings, had no authority to withdraw that evidence, particularly since there was no indication that the evidence was wrong.

Full decision O/165/00 PDF document28Kb