SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2009 MarsdenLR 960

FEDERAL COURT PUTRAJAYA
MCLAREN INTERNATIONAL LTD – Appellant
Versus
LIM YAT MEEN – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:SF Wong,S Indran ,Respondent Advocate: Suaran Singh

JUDGMENT

Abdul Aziz Mohamad FCJ:

[1] The respondent has been the registered proprietor of the trade mark "McLaren" (Trade Mark No 9202266) since 11 April 1992, when he applied for registration of the trade mark. The approval of the registration had retrospective effect from that date. The registration is in respect of "articles of clothing, including boots, shoes and slippers" in Class 25.

[2] Over seven years later, on 11 August 1999, the appellant company, claiming to be the bona fide proprietor of the trade mark "McLaren", filed application No 9907641 for registration of the trade mark in respect of "articles of clothing, footwear and headgear" in Class 25.

[3] On 16 February 2001, the Registrar of Trade Marks informed the appellants that their application contravened s 19(1) of the Trade Marks Act 1976 ("the Act") in that the trade mark whose registration the appellants sought was identical with the respondent's registered trade mark or so nearly resembled the respondent's registered trade mark as was likely to deceive or cause confusion. s 19(1) prohibits the registration of such a trade mark in respect of any goods or description of goods.

[4] On 3 March 2003, the appellants, by n

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top