BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?

No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!



BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions >> PHILOSOPHY (Trade Mark: Revocation) [1999] UKIntelP o40499 (17 November 1999)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/1999/o40499.html
Cite as: [1999] UKIntelP o40499

[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]


PHILOSOPHY (Trade Mark: Revocation) [1999] UKIntelP o40499 (17 November 1999)

For the whole decision click here: o40499

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

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.



BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/1999/o40499.html