The Gazette 1979

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1979

GAZETTE

26. Section 25. 27. Section 57. In 1977, hearings were held in connection with 218 applications for registration. No notice of appeal to the Court was received by the Controller in respect of his decisions. 28. L.R.C. International Ltd. v The Controller, [ 1976] (H.Ct, 599- 1971). 29. Section 26. On December, 1976, 24 instances of opposition were pending. In 1977, notices of opposition were given in 34 cases. Out of this total (58), application for registration was withdrawn in four cases, opposition was withdrawn in ten cases, and the remaining 44 cases were still pending at the end of the year. 30. Section 27. 31. Id. 32. Section 28. The number of registrations of trade marks renewed in 1977 was 2,905. 33. Section 22. 34. 11974] unrep. (H.Ct., 127-1971). 38. In 1977, 173 persons were entered in the Register as proprietors of trade marks consequent on assignments or transmissions; 674 marks were affected. It has been held that there can be no assignment within the Act of a pending trade mark application; Western States Bank Card Association v The Controller, [19781 unrep. (H.Ct., 126-1975). 39. The Official Journal of Industrial and Commercial Property is issued fortnightly, and occasionally with supplements. It contains particulars of current acts and dealings with patents, designs and trade marks. 42. Section 39. In 1977, the number of persons as Registered Users was 77; 165 registered trade marks were affected by the entries. In the same year, nine registered users were, on application, removed from the register. 43. Sections 40-43. 44. 119631 I.R. 221. See also, e.g., Bulmers Ltd. v Showerings Ltd. 119621 I.R. 189, where an application for the removal of the mark 'Babycham' from the register proved unsuccessful. As to the removal of a mark from the register on the ground of non-user under section 34, see for example the recent case of Beecham Group Ltd. v Goodalls of Ireland Ltd., [ 19781 unrep. (H.Ct., 4662-1977). 45. Section 12. Also on infringement, see sections 10, 11, 13, 14, 15 and 16. 46. 119711 I.R. 16. See also, e.g., Coca-Cola Co. v F. Cade A Sons 119571 I.R. 196 \ I B P Industrie Buitoni Perugina S.PA. v Dowdall O'Hahoney A Company Manufacturing Ltd., [1978] unrep. (Hct., 5715-1977). 47. Section 14. 48. Section 12(3). 49. Section 16. 50. For the provisions relating to the Office of the Controller, see in particular Part 3 of the Act, i.e., sections 48-62. It is worth noting that the Minister for Industry, Commerce and Energy is empowered under section 3 and 44 to make rules governing the admininstration of the Act: current rules are the Trade Mark (Amendment) Rules, contained in Statutory Instrument 26/1977. Notice also that, under section 84 of the Patents Act, 1964, the Controller is obliged to furnish an annual report to the Oireachtas. 51. 119591 I.G.R. 35. See also, e.g., Sterling A Winthrop v Farberfabriken Bayer [1967] I.R. 97; Cantrell A Cochrane (Dublin) Ltd. v Savage Smith A Co. Ltd. [J975] unrep. (H.Ct., 2884-1975); C. A A. Modes and C. A A. Ireland v C. & A. (Waterford) Ltd., and Others [ 19751 unrep. (sup. Ct., 103-1975); Grange Marketing Ltd. v M. A Q. Plastic Products Ltd. [ 1976] unrep. (H.Ct., 80-1976). 52. For an account of the relevance of these articles to industrial property rights generally, see C. Bellamy & G. Child, Common Market Law of Competition, pp. 196-959 (1973). 53. For a treatment of the recent trends in the relevant case law, see J. Temple Long, Recent Developments in E.E.C. Restrictive Practices and Monopoly Law, I Journal of the Irish Society for European Law 4 (1977). 54. Case 40/70, Sirena v Eda; C.C.H. Common Market Reporter (Court Decisions, 1971-1973) at para. 8101. See also, e.g., Case 96/75, E.M.I, v C.B.S. Schallplatten G M.B.H.; [1976] 2 C.M.L.R. 235. 40. Section 31(1). 41. Section 36(10). 35. Section 12. 36. Section 13. 37. Section 30.

who are looking towards the European export markets. Implementation of these proposals is expected in the 1980s. 66 FOOTNOTES 1. This point is demonstrated by the following figures: during the year ending in December, 1977, the applications for registration of trade marks numbered 3,319; the corresponding figures for 1963 and 1967 were 1,661 and 1,999 respectively. Notice that subsequent references to figures for acts and dealings under the Trade Marks Act, 1963, in respect of the year 1977, are based on the Fiftieth Report of the Controller of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks; that report was issued in April, 1978. 2. Recognition of trade mark agents is provided for in section 69 of the Trade Marks Act, 1963. At the end of 1977, there were 95 persons and 10 partnerships entered on the register of trade mark agents. 3. Trade Marks Act, 1963, section 2(1). Further references to sections will refer to the Trade Marks Act, 1963, unless the contrary is indicated. 4. Id. 5. See, e.g., Re Bank of America National Trust A Savings Association ( H.Ct.) [1977] F.S.R. 7; Western States Bank Card Association v The Controller of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks [19781 unrep. (H.Ct., 126-1975). See also, e.g., Re Royal Inns of America Inc., [1977] F.S.R. 144, a case which concerned marks used in catering services. Notice that, in future citations, the Controller of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks will be referred to simply as The Controller 6. Supra at footnote 3. In Re Parke Davis A Co. (H.Ct [19761 F.S.R. 195, for example, a blue band on a capsule containing a pharmaceutical product was held to be a trade mark within the Act. See also, e.g., Arby's Inc. v The Controller [19781 unrep. (333-1976). 7. Section 9. In 1977, regisgrations of trade marks numbered 1,380 in Part A, and 380 in Part B. 8. Section 17(1). 9. See also e.g., Re A.C.E.C. (Ireland) Ltd. [19641 l.R. 201. 10. [19661 I.R. 266. 11. See, e.g., Re Mothercare Ltd., [19681 I.R. 359; Application of Philip Morris Inc. [19701 I.R. 82; Application of Schweppes (Overseas) Ltd. [19701 I.R. 209; Re Kilku (Sup. Ct.) [19781 F.S.R. 246. 12. See, e.g., Re Mothercare Ltd. [19681 supra at footnote 11; Farah Manufacturing Co. Inc. v The Controller [1972] unrep. (H.Ct., 172-1971); Badische Tabak Manifacktur Roth Handle G.M.B.H. v The Controller (1972) unrep. (HCt.); Lever Brothers (Ireland) Limited v The controller [19741 unrep. (H.Ct., 45-1972); La Chemise Lacoste SA. v The Controller 119781 unrep. (38-1974). 13. Section 18(1). 14. For cases in which the criterion for Part B registration has been discussed, see, e.g., Lever Brothers (Ireland) Ltd. v The Controller, supra at footnote 12; Miele A C.I.E. v The Con- troller [ 1975] unrep. (H.Ct., 1965-1974); La Chemise Lacoste S.A. v The Controller, supra at footnote 10. 15. Passage from the judgement of the English Court of Appeal in The Weldmark Trade Mark [19661 R.P.C. 220, cited with approval by Kenny J. in J. C. Penney Inc. v The Controller, 119741 unrep. (H.Ct., 190-1973) at 12. 16. Re Apphrodisia Faberge Inc. v. The Controller (H.Ct.) 119771 F S R 133 17. Re Kreuzer(\\.CX.) [ 19781 F.S.R. 239. 18. Sections 3, 11 and 44. Of the various classifications, the most important in numerical terms have been Pharmaceutical substances etc., Chemical products etc., Bleaching preparations etc.. Coffee, tea, cocoa, sugar, rice, etc., and Clothing, including boots, shoes and slippers. The classification of Pahrmaceutical substances etc. has, more or less consistently, been the one in respect of which most trade marks have been registered annually; 345 marks were registered for that classification in 1977.

19. Section 35. 20. Section 45. 21. Sections 31, 35(3) and 38(1).

22. Section 29. 23. Section 19. 24. Section 20. 25. 119701 I.R. 169. See also, e.g., Carroll A Co. Ltd. v Phillip Morris Incorporated 119701 I.R. 115.

11