Image Factory Ltd v. Registrar of Companies

Case No.HCMP 2471/2011
Court
High Court CFI
Date05 Jan 2012
Judge
Case Document
100%

HCMP 2471/2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO. 2471 OF 2011

-------------------

IN THE MATTER OF sections 52(2) and 53(5) of the Trade Marks Ordinance, Cap. 559 (“the Ordinance”)
and
IN THE MATTER OF the registered trade mark “Milky” numbered No. 300051371 registered in the name of Elegant Star International (Holdings) Limited in Class 16 goods

-------------------

BETWEEN

IMAGE FACTORY LIMITED Applicant
and
REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES Respondent

-------------------

Before: Hon Sakhrani J in Chambers

Date of Hearing: 5 January 2012

Date of Judgment: 5 January 2012

-------------------

J U D G M E N T

-------------------

1.The applicant is the owner of the registered trade mark “Milk” in classes 18 and 25 for goods and services. Its application for registration of the applicant’s mark in classes 9, 16, 35 and 41 for goods and services in March 2007 was rejected by the Trade Marks Registry on the ground that there was another mark being trade mark registration no. 300051371 “Milky” registered in class 16 goods which was regarded by the Trade Marks Registry as a similar mark (“the respondent’s mark”) on or about 23 July 2003.

2.The registered owner of the respondent’s mark is a limited company formerly known as Link Dragon Limited (永龍有限公司) (“the company”).  The name of the company was changed to Elegant Star International (Holdings) Limited on or about 17 March 2004. 

3.The company was dissolved on deregistration on or about 27 June 2008.  That being so, the properties of the company including the respondent’s mark are deemed to be bona vacantia and shall belong to the respondent pursuant to section 292 of the Companies Ordinance, Cap. 32.

4.By section 52(2)(a) of the Trade Marks Ordinance, Cap. 559 the registration of a trade mark may be revoked on the ground that the trade mark has not been genuinely used in Hong Kong by the owner or with his consent, in relation to the goods or services for which it is registered, for a continuous period of at least 3 years, and there are no valid reasons for non-use. 

5.There is no evidence at all before me to show that the respondent’s mark has been used at any time. 

6.The Registrar of Companies who is the respondent in these proceedings has indicated that it will not object to the application of the applicant provided that there will be no order as to costs. That has been agreed by the applicant. 

7.I am satisfied on the evidence that the respondent’s mark should be revoked for non-use. 

8.I make an order that the registration of the respondent’s mark be revoked. 

9.I make no order as to costs as this has been agreed by the applicant and the respondent.

(Arjan H Sakhrani)
Judge of the Court of First Instance,
High Court

Mr Kent Yee, instructed by Messrs T. C. Foo & Co., for the Applicant

Respondent, absent