Trade Marks, registration of
Trade Marks, registration of legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
S. 10-Trade mark, registration of-Discretion, exercise of-Section 10 verily confers discretion on Registrar to take into account social as well as economic considerations but such considerations not sole considerations for exercise of discretion under S. 10Tribunal also to consider public interests and public interests never furthered by doing anything encouraging dishonesty-Respondent having dishonestly copied mark of another, Registrar, held, exercised his discretion correctly in dismissing respondent's application for registration of disputed mark. S. 10 (2)-Trade mark, registration of -Words "other special circumstances" appearing in S. 10 (2)-Dishonest concurrent use of trade mark of another proprietor if supposed to fall under words "other special circumstances", word "honest" preceding words "concurrent use" would be rendered redundant but redundancy cannot be lightly attributed to Legislature.-[Interpretation of statutes].
S.8(a)-Trade mark, registration of-Evidence of actual deception or confusion-Not necessary for refusal to register trade mark-Registrar duty bound to refuse registration of trade mark likely to deceive or cause confusion Likelihood of confusion in mind of man of ordinary prudence-Sufficient for refusal Words "Livatogen" and "Livegen" used in respect of same class of goods
Held.: both resembled visually and phonetically and likely to cause confusion.
Ss. 8 & 10-Trade Mark, registration of-Conditions to be imposed by Registrar-Discretionary-Registrar cannot, however, impose a condition arbitrarily or capriciously-Order of Registrar imposing conditions for registration of Trade Mark-Open to appeal before High Court.
"Trade Marks, registration of", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/15261
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Trade Marks, registration of"
P L D 1986 Karachi 371
MESSRS WURTTEMBERGISCHE PARFUMERIE GMBH‑Appellant Versus THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (I) OF TRADE MARKS, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN ‑Respondent
Court:P L D 1982 Karachi 263
MUHAMMAD SAEED JEHANGIR‑‑Applicant Versus MRS. SANJIDA BANO AND ANOTHER‑Respondents
Court: ‑‑ Ss. 10 & 16 read with Trade Marks Rules, 1963, r. 23‑Trade mark, registration of‑Appeal of respondent pending in Court‑Application for registration cannot be contended to have been finally disposed of Appeal (civil).1992 C L C 1902
F.W. WOOLWORTH COMPANY‑‑‑Appellant Versus THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS‑‑‑Respondent
Court: Karachi1981 S C M R 1039
INC.)-Appellant Versus PAKISTAN GENERAL STORES AND ANOTHER-Respondents
Court: S. 10-Trade marks, registration of-Appellant foreign manufac turer and seller of certain types of wearing apparel under trade mark "Jockey" exporting its products under such mark to Pakistan but on imports of such items being banned not selling its products in Pakistan-Appellant having had high hopes of selling its products in Pakistan some day applied for registration of its trade mark "Jockey" and such application allowed by Registrar, Trade Marks-Some years later respondent commencing to sell like sort of wearing apparel under trade mark "Jockey" and applying to Registrar, Trade Marks for its registration and also applying for striking off appellant's trade mark "Jockey" from register of trade marks on ground of appellant having stopped selling its products in Pakistan and no longer remained in position to sell them because of import restriction but without success held : Fact of appellant having not been selling its products ' in Pakistan because of import restrictions-Does not entitle respondent to copy appellant's trade mark since by doing so it deceives public into thinking that its products are products of appellant-Respondent also not proving use of trade mark "Jockey" being honestly undertaken and such burden lying on respondent to discharge, Registrar, held, rightly held respondent to have dishonestly copied appellant's mark and refused respondent's application for registration of such mark. Burden of proof.1988 C L C 919
Malik IMAMUDDIN‑‑Appellant Versus MAAZ DAWAKHANA UNANI and another‑‑Respondents
Court: KarachiP L D 1977 Karachi 858
GLAXO LABORATORIES LTD., ENGLAND‑Appellant Versus ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, TRADE MARKS, KARACHI AND ANOTHER‑Respondents
Court: ‑‑‑‑ O, XIX. r. 2‑Affidavit ‑‑Legal arguments and submissions‑Held: Not strictly permissible in affidavit evidence.‑Affidavit.1986 C L C 1636
Messrs BATA LIMITED‑‑Appellant Versus Messrs ALLIED CORPORATION and another‑‑Respondents
Court: Karachi1993 C L C 2203
FERRING A.B.‑Appellant Versus THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS‑‑‑Respondent
Court: Karachi1993 C L C 2201
GRINNELL CORPORATION‑‑‑Appellant Versus THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS‑‑‑Respondent
Court: Karachi1993 C L C 2196
DIAMOND FOODS INDUSTRIES LIMITED‑‑‑Appellant Versus THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS‑‑‑Respondent
Court: Karachi