CHRISTIE MANSON & WOODS LTD AND ANOTHER v. CHRITRS (GROUP) LTD AND ANOTHER

CHRISTIE MANSON & WOODS LTD AND ANOTHER v. CHRITRS (GROUP) LTD AND ANOTHER

The court found the defendants' English and Chinese signs very similar to the plaintiffs' marks and used in identical services (auctioneering), there was both actual confusion and weighty admission by the defendants; plaintiffs' marks are well-known in Hong Kong and the defendants failed to show due cause or a sustainable s19 defence (registration post-dated acts); accordingly infringement under s18(3) and s18(4) and passing off were established and summary judgment on liability was entered for the plaintiffs.

Citation
CHRISTIE MANSON & WOODS LTD AND ANOTHER v. CHRITRS (GROUP) LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
1st Plaintiff: CHRISTIE MANSON & WOODS LIMITED; 2nd Plaintiff: CHRISTIE S HONG KONG LIMITED; 1st Defendant: CHRITRS (GROUP) LIMITED; 2nd Defendant: Unidentified director (D2)
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
14 November 2012
Case Number
HCA1418/2011
Procedural Posture
Trade Mark Infringement and Passing Off / Summary Judgment (liability)
Outcome
Judgment for plaintiffs on liability (summary judgment) for infringement of Trade Marks Ordinance s18(3) and s18(4) and for passing off
Legal Topics
Trade Marks Ordinance S18(3), Trade Marks Ordinance S18(4), Section 19 Defence, Summary Judgment, Likelihood of Confusion, Well Known Trade Mark
Source Language
EN
Intellectual Property Trade Marks Passing Off Civil Procedure Trade Marks Ordinance S18(3) Trade Marks Ordinance S18(4) Section 19 Defence Summary Judgment +2 more

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 27 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CHRISTIE MANSON & WOODS LIMITED

1st Plaintiff

CHRISTIE S HONG KONG LIMITED

2nd Plaintiff

CHRITRS (GROUP) LIMITED

1st Defendant

Unidentified director (D2)

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Trade Mark Infringement and Passing Off / Summary Judgment (liability)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendants' English and Chinese signs are similar to plaintiffs' registered marks
  2. 2 Whether use of the signs in auctioneering is likely to cause confusion under s18(3)
  3. 3 Whether plaintiffs' marks are well-known in Hong Kong and s18(4) applies (unfair advantage/detriment)

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the defendants' English and Chinese signs very similar to the plaintiffs' marks and used in identical services (auctioneering), there was both actual confusion and weighty admission by the defendants; plaintiffs' marks are well-known in Hong Kong and the defendants failed to show due cause or a sustainable s19 defence (registration post-dated acts); accordingly infringement under s18(3) and s18(4) and passing off were established and summary judgment on liability was entered for the plaintiffs.

Court Disposition

Judgment for plaintiffs on liability (summary judgment) for infringement of Trade Marks Ordinance s18(3) and s18(4) and for passing off

Orders

  • Judgment in terms of paragraphs 1-6 of the summons
  • Injunction restraining defendants from infringing the plaintiffs' trade marks and from passing off