INJUNCTION SOUGHT

Dominion, Volume 24, Issue 52, 25 November 1930, Page 11

INJUNCTION SOUGHT

Trade-Marks on Ploughs ALLEGED INFRINGEMENT Dominion Special Service. Christchurch, November 24. A company whose business of manufacturing agricultural implements in England dates back to 1789 instigated proceedings in the Supreme Court to-day against a Christchurch firm, alleging infringement of trade marks on ploughs and parts of ploughs. The case is expected to occupy several days., Plaintiff is Ransome, Simes and Jefferies, Limited, Ipswich, England, and defendant P. and D. Dunean. Limited, Christchurch. Mr. J. C. Peacock (Wellington) appeared for plaintiff, and Messrs. J. H. Upham and E. W. White for defendant. An injunction was sought to restrain defendant from infringing plaintiff’s trade marks, were in particular from applying the mark, “R.N.F.,” to any ploughs or parts manufactured by defendant. The defendant company asked that the Trade Mark Register be rectified by striking out the mark “R.N.F.” as being improperly, registered, in that it was recognised as being only a pattern of a head, and not denoting that such a share was made by a particular firm. According to the statement of claim plaintiff was the registered proprietor in New Zealand of the trade marks “R.N.F.,” "Ransome,” and "Ransomes Patent” for ploughs and parts of ploughs in class 7, which were registered in June, 1889. Defendant company. it was alleged, had infringed the plaintiff’s marks by manufacturing and selling shares for ploughs bearing the mark “R.N.F.,” and by advertising along those lines. Some Early History’. The defence set out that at the time of the settlement of Canterbury and for many years afterward no or cast-iron shares were made in New Zealand, all being imported from England and Scotland. In 1863 Reid and Gray. Ltd., commenced manufacturing in Oainaru, and in .the same year the defendant company started in Christchurch, but as no ehilled cast shares were then produced in New Zealand and the local manufacturers made their ploughs with a head to which would fit the standard pattern of shares from England and Scotland. Reid and Gray kept principally to the “Gray” or “Scotch head” pattern, but made their ploughs for the Christchurch and Ashburton districts with an “R.N.F.” head. The defendant company made its ploughs with the English standard pattern of head of “Ransome’s R.N.F.’’ or “Hornsby’s C.” Defendant company had never advertised or sold its plough or parts except as of its own manufacture, but when it commenced making ploughs in 1868 it sold them with a head “made to either Hornsby’s C. or Ransome’s R.N.F shares.” That was the only way of indicating the pattern of the head. In 1881 the defendant company manufactured chilled cast shares as “P. and D. Duncan, R.N.F.,” or "P. and D. Duncan C.” In 1889 the letters “R.N.F.” when applied to the head of a plough constituted a pattern mark of a head. Stock Confiscated. Mr. Peacock stated that a West Australian firm had had its stock confiscated because of infringements of the trade mark. Alfred Percival Keightley. Australian and New Zealand agent for the plaintiff company, said that the company commenced business in 1789. Witness said his company’s business in New Zealand in plough shares totalled 8000 or 9000 dozen annually. He described sending a warning to P. and D. Duncan regarding the marking on the shares. The case was adjourned till to-morrow.