International General Electric Company of New York Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | LORD JUSTICE UPJOHN,LORD JUSTICE DIPLOCK |
| Judgment Date | 11 April 1962 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1962] EWCA Civ J0411-2 |
| Court | Court of Appeal |
| Date | 11 April 1962 |
International General Electric Compainy of New York Ltd.
[1962] EWCA Civ J0411-2
Lord Justice Upjohn and
Lord Justice Diplock
In The Supreme Court of Judicature
Court of Appeal
From Mr Justice Plowman
MR R. G. LLOYD, Q. C. and MR PETER HAY WARD (instructed by Messrs Slaughter & May) appeared as Counsel for the Appellants.
MR E. BLANSHARD STAMP (instructed by the Solicitor of Customs & Excise) appeared as Counsel for the Respondents.
This is an appeal from an order made yesterday by Mr Justice Plowman who refused to grant any ex parte relief to the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs come before this Court by his leave, and in view of the urgency of the matter, application having been made yesterday, this Court agreed to hear the matter this morning.
The relevant facts, very briefly, are these. The first plaintiffs, International General Electric Company of New York Ltd., are an English subsidiary, wholly owned I believe, of the General Electric Company, that being a large Company incorporated in some State of America, and they have for many years-they say for 4O to 50 years - been importing a variety of goods, which I need not specify, goods mainly concerned, as the name of the plaintiffs would imply, with the electrical industry under a device mark which has the initials in fancy style "GE" enclosed in a circle with a device round it. Their goods and letter heading all bear, and have borne for many years, these marks. In March of this year certain consignments were stopped by the defendants, the Commissioners of Customs and Excise, upon the ground that the importation into this country infringed the Merchandise Harks Act 1887-1953 because it was said that the goods bearing this fancy device mark "GE" infringed the mark "GEC" which is alleged to be the trade mark of the General Electric Company Ltd., a large Company incorporated in this country. That is no doubt an interesting dispute which will one day be determined and I propose to say no more about the merits, for the very simple raason that we have not gone into them.
The plaintiffs thereupon moved Mr Justice Plowman, as I have already said, yesterday and the defendants then appeared and said they desired time to put in evidence in answer to the evidence filed by the plaintiffs and Mr Justice Plowman gavecertain directions about that matter. Thereupon, as I have said, the plaintiffs moved ex part and, putting it shortly, what they asked for was an interim declaration that the defendants were "not entitled to detain or threaten to detain under or by virtue of the Merchandise Marks Acts, 1887 to 1953. or otherwise, chart papers, receiving tubes or signal diodes or other goods being the merchandise of the plaintiffs or either of them and marketed in relation to a device mark containing the letters "GE". Secondly, that the defendants were "not entitled to disclose to third parties, without the consent of the plaintiffs or either of them, the names of customers of the plaintiffs", and, thirdly, "a declaration that the defendants are not entitled to inform customers of the plaintiffs or either of them that the plaintiffs' device mark containing the letters "GE" is, or has been ruled to be, an infringement of a registered trade mark "GEC".
It will be observed that the form of the motion is unusual. It does not ask for an interlocutory injunction, and for this good and sound reason, that as the Commissioners of Customs and Excise are a department of the Crown, no injunction could be obtained against them. That is because of Section 21 of the Crown Proceedings Act, 1947. which I must read. Section 21 is in these terms: "In any civil proceedings by or against the Crown the Court shall, subject to the provisions of this Act, have power to make all such orders as it has power to make in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ranks Hovis McDougall v Controller of Patents
...... dictionary published by the Educational Company of Ireland the word is described as "the making ..."composition of matter", I suppose, in the general sense, everything is composed of matter of some ...On appeal to the United States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals, it was held by a majority ... . 20The General Electric Company's Application (1961) R.P.C. 21 to which ......
- Chong Ket Sui David v Datuk Chau Tet on (Chairman and office bearer of Royal Sabah Turf Club for and on behalf of himself and the Management Committee of the Royal Sabah Turf Club)
-
Bocotra Construction Pte Ltd and Others v Attorney General
...... rules) modelled on the Singapore International Arbitration Centre Rules would govern the conduct ...In this case, the Customs and Excise detained goods marked `GE` belonging o the plaintiffs, a company incorporated under the law of New York, on the ......
-
Bocotra Construction Pte Ltd and Others v Attorney General
...... Arbitration Rules of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre was agreed upon (`the agreed ...In International General Electric Co of New York Ltd & Anor v Commissioners of oms & Excise , the first plaintiff was a British company and ..., the defendants, the Commissioners of Customs and Excise, stopped the plaintiffs` goods upon ......