Read the full judgment text of CACC 000415/1973 on BabelCite. This Court of Appeal judgment.
1. The appellant faced three charges under s.3(2) of the Merchandise Marks Ordinance, Cap. 41. The first charge alleged that he had in his possession, for the purpose of trade, 26 watches bearing the forged trade mark "Rolex", such watches not having been manufactured by or with the assent of the Rolex Company of Switzerland; the second charge alleged possession, for the purposes of manufacture, of goods to which a forged trade mark, namely, "Rolex", had been applied, those goods being 87 watch