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 >> ADRENALIN (Trade Mark: Revocation) [1999] UKIntelP o28799 (24 August 1999)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/1999/o28799.html
Cite as: [1999] UKIntelP o28799

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


ADRENALIN (Trade Mark: Revocation) [1999] UKIntelP o28799 (24 August 1999)

For the whole decision click here: o28799

Trade mark decision

BL Number
O/287/99
Decision date
24 August 1999
Hearing officer
Mr D Landau
Mark
ADRENALIN
Classes
03
Proprietors
Mr N D Gracey & Mrs E Gracey
Applicant for Revocation
Unilever Plc
Revocation
Section 46 and request for discovery under Rules 51 and 52(1) of the Trade Mark Rules 1994 (as amended)

Result

Rules 51 & 52(1) - Request for discovery refused

Points Of Interest

Summary

Following an interlocutory hearing, the Hearing Officer refused the proprietors' request for discovery in two areas, namely (a) who undertook investigations in relation to use of the mark in suit, and when and with what result, and (b) the support for the applicant's deponent's opinion as to the grounds of non-use submitted by the proprietors.

In his statement of grounds for his decision, the Hearing Officer explained that the proprietors had confirmed non-use of the mark in suit, and had failed to furnish evidence of use in accordance with Rule 31(3). In his view, therefore, it could not be of evidential materiality, or necessary to dispose of the proceedings, to ascertain details of the investigation that took place as to use of the mark in suit. Furthermore, in the circumstances of this case, he regarded the request as to (a) as a 'fishing expedition'. (P v T Ltd distinguished).

The opinion of the applicant's deponent was not a matter open to discovery



BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/1999/o28799.html