| Case ID |
306f1766-ab85-4f14-bec9-9d68a5bc06bf |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
MA. No. 8 of 1992 |
| Decision Date |
Nov 29, 1992 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The registration of the trade mark 'DDAVP' was unjustly refused by the respondent on the grounds that there were no prior instances of similar trade marks starting with 'DD'. The court found that the authority did not provide compelling reasons for the refusal and noted that the relevant law does not mandate that a trade mark must be familiar to the public for it to be registered. The court allowed the appeal, set aside the previous order, and directed the respondent to proceed with the registration of the trade mark 'DDAVP' as requested by the appellant. |
| Summary |
In the case before the Sindh High Court, the appellant, a pharmaceutical company, sought the registration of the trade mark 'DDAVP' for a new diabetes insipidus drug. The Deputy Registrar of Trade Marks denied the application, claiming the public was unfamiliar with such a term. The appellant challenged this decision, arguing that the law does not require trade marks to be commonly known. The court agreed, stating that the authority failed to justify the refusal adequately. This landmark case underscores the importance of distinguishing between common and uncommon trade marks in the registration process. The judgment emphasizes that unique trade marks can enhance brand recognition and consumer memory, thus benefiting the market. This decision sets a precedent for future trade mark applications, allowing for greater creativity in branding within the pharmaceutical industry and beyond. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
AHMED YAR KHAN, J
|
| Lawyers |
Mr. Abdul Hameed Iqbal
|
| Petitioners |
FERRING A.B.
|
| Respondents |
THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS
|
| Citations |
1993 SLD 1027,
1993 CLC 2203
|
| Other Citations |
Not available
|
| Laws Involved |
Trade Marks Act (V of 1940)
|
| Sections |
10
|