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!
 |
[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 >> ASHWOOD GROVE (Trade Mark: Revocation) [2004] UKIntelP o01504 (14 January 2004) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2004/o01504.html Cite as: [2004] UKIntelP o01504, [2004] UKIntelP o1504 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
For the whole decision click here: o01504
Result
Section 46(1) - Revocation successful
Points Of Interest
Summary
The registered proprietors’ mark was registered with an International Priority date of 18 March, 1996. They claimed that the mark was first used on Wines in Australia in 1997 and efforts had been made to find a UK distributor from 1998 onwards; sample bottles of wine had been sent to the UK and bottles of ASHWOOD GROVE wine had been displayed and offered for sale at the 1999 or 2000 London Wine Trade Fair. In further evidence the registered proprietors claimed that they sold ASHWOOD GROVE wine to Cathy Pacific Airlines who regularly fly to London and also that a consignment of 500 cases of such wines were received in the UK and samples were exhibited at the Australia Wine Bureau tasting in London in February 2003. (This last item was outside the relevant five year period).
The Hearing Officer considered carefully the evidence placed before him by the registered proprietors. He found that there was little documentary evidence to substantiate or explain the nature of the various contacts with UK distributors nor was there any evidence to say what had happened to the samples said to have been sent to the UK. As regards the London Wine Trade Fair there was no evidence or photographs to show how ASHWOOD GROVE wines were displayed or brought to the attention of the public. Overall the Hearing Officer found the registered proprietors evidence too ill-focused and not convincing and he concluded that there had been no genuine use of the mark in suit and that the application for revocation succeeded. Revocation effected from 21 February 2002.
