Multi-Access Ltd v Guanghzhou Wong Lo Kat Great Health Business Development Co Ltd

Multi-Access Ltd v Guanghzhou Wong Lo Kat Great Health Business Development Co Ltd

The appeal was dismissed because the Proprietor failed to prove genuine use of the trade marks during the relevant periods. The evidence was insufficient, uncorroborated, and did not relate to the goods as specified in the registrations when interpreted in light of the Nice Classification. Even if there had been use on canned herbal tea, such goods were not covered by the specifications in Class 5 or Class 32 as registered. The Hearing Officer applied the correct legal principles and did not err in his assessment of the evidence or interpretation of the specifications.

Parties
Appellant/proprietor: Multi-Access Limited; Respondent/applicant: Guanghzou Wong Lo Kat Great Health Business Development Co Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Trade Mark Revocation Appeal / High Court Appeal From UKIPO Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Trade Marks, Revocation for Non Use, Interpretation of Specifications, Nice Classification, Burden of Proof, Genuine Use
Intellectual Property Trade Marks Revocation for Non Use Interpretation of Specifications Nice Classification Burden of Proof Genuine Use

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Multi-Access Limited

Appellant/proprietor

Guanghzou Wong Lo Kat Great Health Business Development Co Ltd

Respondent/applicant

Procedural Posture

Trade Mark Revocation Appeal / High Court Appeal From UKIPO Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Hearing Officer erred in revoking trade mark registrations for non-use under section 46 of the Trade Marks Act 1994
  2. 2 Whether the evidence demonstrated genuine use of the trade marks during the relevant periods
  3. 3 Whether the goods for which use was claimed fell within the specifications as registered, interpreted with reference to the Nice Classification

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the Proprietor failed to prove genuine use of the trade marks during the relevant periods. The evidence was insufficient, uncorroborated, and did not relate to the goods as specified in the registrations when interpreted in light of the Nice Classification. Even if there had been use on canned herbal tea, such goods were not covered by the specifications in Class 5 or Class 32 as registered. The Hearing Officer applied the correct legal principles and did not err in his assessment of the evidence or interpretation of the specifications.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The revocation of UK trade mark registrations 1495166 and 1495167 stands.