Dunlop Wins Trade Mark Appeal
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
I N the Chancery Division, last week. Mr. Justice Simonds heard an appeal by the Dunlop Rubber Co., Ltd„ from the decision of the Registrar of Trade Marks refusing to register as a trade mark the words " Trak Grip" in respect of pneumatic tyres for heavy vehicles.
Mr. Lloyd Jacob, for the Dunlop concern, said the mark was used for tyres which had a very deep tread to enable heavy vehicles to obtain a good grip of the land or road. The general advertising expenditure in connection with the trade mark had been in the neighbourhood of £100,000 per annum and, since 1931, tyres to the value of £2,068,000 had been sold under the mark. There was an abundance of evidence that the mark was distinctive of the goods of the Dunlop concern.
The application was not opposed, hut the Registrar held that the mark was per se unregisterable under the Trade Marks Act. He said that "road grip " was a familiar expression to describe a particular quality ot tyre and the word " track " was a variant of road." Therefore, he concluded that " Traa Grip " was merely a description of tyres,
Mr. Justice Simonds, allowing the appeal, said the mark was a word which one would find neither in the dictionary nor in the common use of English. If, however, the compound had become familiar, the applicant had made it so, and if anyone else desired to use it to describe his own commercial article, his lordship would suspect that it was with no proper motive. He must reverse the Registrar's decision and ask him to proceed with the application. In all the years the•applicant had used the mark, the Court had never heard of any other person attempting to adopt it.