Trade mark decision

BL Number

O/404/99

Decision date

17 November 1999

Hearing Officer

Mr S P Rowan

Mark

PHILOSOPHY

Classes

25

Applicant (Registered Proprietor)

Nicholas Dynes Gracey

Opponent (Applicant for Revocation)

Alberta Ferretti

Opposition

Preliminary hearing in respect of Discovery

Result

Request for disclosure refused

Points Of Interest

• 1. Rule 52(1) relates only to the production of documents - not the provision of information
• 2. Fruits of discovery must be relevant to the trade mark dispute at issue
• 3. Offer by the applicants to withdraw the offending paragraphs from the Statutory Declaration not acceptable to the Registered Proprietor.

Summary

There had previously been a request for discovery which was granted. The Registry accepted information from the applicants as discharging their responsibility but the registered proprietor was not satisfied and appealed to the Appointed Person. A fresh Order was issued and the applicants Investigator, Mr A Keith, filed a further Statutory Declaration. In this declaration Mr Keith referred to a conversation between himself and members of bar staff in a Public House and stated that he was told that the registered proprietor, Mr Gracey, had been banned from the Public House.

The fresh request for discovery related to pretext, time and name of the Public House together with a description of the member of bar staff concerned. A further Statutory Declaration by Mr Keith failed to provide all the information requested and the fresh request for discovery was maintained but limited to a request to provide the name of the public house mentioned in Mr Keith's declarations.

The Hearing Officer decided that the request for such information was outside the confines of the Trade Marks Act and Rules as the information could not be used in relation to the trade mark dispute at issue.

Full decision O/404/99 27Kb