TRADE MARKS ON LIQUOR

Otago Witness, Issue 3194, 2 June 1915, Page 3

TRADE MARKS ON LIQUOR

AN INJUNCTION GRANTED. His Honor Mr Justice Sim had before hint on Monday a case in which two firms engaged in tho liquor-.trade were concerned. ilia plaintiffs were Powley and Co., and tho defendants the Southern Brewery Company, and tho claim was for an injunction to restrain defendants, their servants, and agents from infringing the plaintiffs’ trade mark, and in particular from disposing of liquor in any way, not- manufactured or bottled by plaintiff,’ in bottles bearing such trade mark, or a material part of it. Plaintiffs also claimed £ICG damages for profits derived from the infringement. The details were that plaintiffs were the assignees of the trade mark “ Moa,” originally held by Powley and Keast. On three specific occasions such, trade mark had been infringed through defendants selling liquor in bottles upon which was embossed plaintiffs! trade mark —namely, sales to Elizabeth Cahill, on November 10, 1914; to John Miller, on March 15, 1915; and to

Uccil Henry Street, on March 15, 1915, Since August 1, 1914, various other sales had taken

place. An answer had been filed by defendants, in which they denied the allegation! made.

Mr Hay appeared for plaintiff's and Mi Brugh for defendants. Mr Brugh stated that there was nothing left for him to 'say, except that defendants

had covered up the embossed trade marls with their labels, and they had thought that the ownership passed to them, and that they were entitled to use the bottles. But in view of the decision in Thomson v. Phillips there was now nothing loft but to consent to judgment. Judgment was entered up ifi the form indicated.