AVON PRODUCTS, INC v. DEAN L. RHOADES

AVON PRODUCTS, INC v. DEAN L. RHOADES

Leave to appeal was granted because the case raises important questions of law of general application: interpretation of Rule 16(4) as to when a Registrar's two‑month extension runs (supporting a view that it can run from the date of decision/hearing) and the application of Rule 91(1) to the provision of reasons and consequent appeal timetables; accordingly an extension of time to file the appeal was ordered.

Citation
AVON PRODUCTS, INC v. DEAN L. RHOADES
Parties
Intended Opponent: Avon Products, Inc; Applicant for Registration: Dean L. Rhoades; Registrar: Registrar of Trade Marks
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
23 May 2005
Case Number
HCMP1012/2005
Procedural Posture
Trade Marks — Extension of Time and Intended Appeal / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal (application for Extension of Time)
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted and extension of time to file the appeal ordered
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Appeal, Statutory Interpretation, Reasons for Decision, Costs
Source Language
EN
Trade Mark Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Extension of Time Appeal Statutory Interpretation Reasons for Decision Costs

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Avon Products, Inc

Intended Opponent

Dean L. Rhoades

Applicant for Registration

Registrar of Trade Marks

Registrar

Procedural Posture

Trade Marks — Extension of Time and Intended Appeal / Ruling on Application for Leave to Appeal (application for Extension of Time)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Registrar's two‑month extension under Rule 16(4) runs from the original deadline or may run from the date of the decision/hearing when the hearing is after expiry
  2. 2 Whether reasons given at the time of decision constitute the Statement of Reasons under Rule 91(1) and the effect on appeal time limits

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was granted because the case raises important questions of law of general application: interpretation of Rule 16(4) as to when a Registrar's two‑month extension runs (supporting a view that it can run from the date of decision/hearing) and the application of Rule 91(1) to the provision of reasons and consequent appeal timetables; accordingly an extension of time to file the appeal was ordered.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted and extension of time to file the appeal ordered

Orders

  • Leave to appeal granted
  • Extension of time to file the appeal — appeal to be filed within 14 days of 23 May 2005