COURT OF APPEAL.

Press, Volume LVIII, Issue 11006, 2 July 1901, Page 5

COURT OF APPEAL.

(-RES- ASSOCIATIQ.V T__EG_A_t.) WELLINGTON, July 1. "The Appeal Court opened this morning; all the fudges were present. Argument was begun in the case of the Commisdjniier of : Trade andC-sboma v R. Bell and Co., £10, an appeal from the decision of Mr Justioe Edwards: The action is one which was brought by R. Bell and Co. again?t the Com- , missioner of Trade and C_stoms to determine j the validity of the forfeiture under section I 104 of the Patents Designs and Trade Marks Act, 1889, of certain cases of matches of the [ value of £1024, imported by Bell and Co. from London. The respondents have one factory hj London.and another in Wellington. They manufacture matches in Wellington, and also ,bbx«r for their matches, : which hoses are marked "New, Zealand." I They do not, however, manufacture suffi- ! cient boxes in New Zealand for their We_- | lington-made matches, and have to manuI facture- soanß ioxes marked "New Zealand" jjn London, and send them out. Early in 1900, owing to labour troublee, they were unable to folly supply the New Zealand market with lowly-made matches, and their Wellington brancn cabled to the London office to send L_adon-made matches. , The London office did so, us_ig-them to fill boxes marked "New Zealand" which had also to be sent out:" The Customs authorities seized these __ftche_ on arrival jn Wellington, and declared themr-to.be forfeited under section 104 of the Patents Designs and Trade Marks Act, 1889,- on the ground that if landed and sold a breach of section 89 of that Act would _c oo_u_itted, the goods bearing a f&Lse trade description. Mr Justioe Edw_rd_ held that the reepondehts had acted innocently, and that this wasta defence under section 104. The present appeal is from this derision. Mr Bell is appearing for the ap--1 peflants, and Mr Travers and Mr Campbell. 1 for the respondent-..

CABLE NEWS,