Omega SA v Omega Engineering Incorporated

Omega SA v Omega Engineering Incorporated

The 1984 Agreement does not expressly or by necessary implication limit 'excluded goods' to a particular trade mark class. The agreement demarcates the parties' respective fields of goods and Swiss is contractually bound not to oppose Engineering's application for the specified goods, regardless of class. Swiss breached the agreement by opposing the application.

Parties
Appellant: Omega SA; Respondent: Omega Engineering Incorporated
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Summary Judgment and Registrar of Trade Marks Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Trade Mark Co Existence Agreements, Interpretation of Contracts, Trade Mark Classification, Breach of Contract

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Omega SA

Appellant

Omega Engineering Incorporated

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Summary Judgment and Registrar of Trade Marks Decision

  1. 1 Whether the 1984 Agreement prevents Omega SA from opposing Omega Engineering's trade mark application for certain goods in class 14
  2. 2 Whether the definition of 'excluded goods' in the 1984 Agreement is limited by trade mark class

Ratio Decidendi

The 1984 Agreement does not expressly or by necessary implication limit 'excluded goods' to a particular trade mark class. The agreement demarcates the parties' respective fields of goods and Swiss is contractually bound not to oppose Engineering's application for the specified goods, regardless of class. Swiss breached the agreement by opposing the application.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Summary judgment for Omega Engineering Incorporated is upheld
  • Appeal from the decision of the Registrar of Trade Marks is dismissed