Trade mark decision
- BL Number
- O/278/01
- Decision date
- 28 June 2001
- Hearing Officer
- Mr M Knight
- Mark
- FIRETRACE
- Classes
- 09
- Applicants for Invalidation & Revocation
- David Lawrence MeltonSterling Safety LtdFiretrace Ltd
- Registered Proprietor
- Firetrace Ltd
- Interlocutory Hearing
- Late filing of Form TM 8 and Counterstatements in Invalidation and Revocation proceedings.
Result
Registered proprietors not allowed to file Form No 8 and counterstatements but allowed to file a response under Rule 57.
Points Of Interest
- Discretion: Rules 32 (3) and 33 (3) give the Registrar a discretion to allow the Registered Proprietors to remain a party to the proceedings, even if they do not file a Form 8 and counterstatement.
Summary
Following the filing of Invalidation and revocation proceedings, the Registered Proprietors had until 2 June 2001 to file Form TM 8 and Counterstatements in the proceedings. In the event these documents were not filed by the due date and the proprietors agent wrote on 9 June 2001 to say why the deadline had been missed - the assistant dealing with the case had left the firm suddenly and had not recorded the due dates, the firms principal had suffered ill health and there had been a temporary loss of files due to refurbishment. They asked that the proprietors be allowed to remain a party to the proceedings and to file evidence in support of the registration. The Registry refused this request and the proprietors agents requested a hearing.
The wording of Rules 32 (2), (3) and (8) and 33 (2) and (8) indicate that the Registrar has a discretion to allow a party to remain a party to the proceedings even if no Form TM 8 and counterstatement has been filed. The time to file such documents cannot be extended (Rule 68) but in this case the Hearing Officer directed that the registered proprietors should file a letter as a response to the applications (Rule 57) and he further directed that they would be allowed to file evidence in the proceedings.
Full decision O/278/01 35Kb