The applicant filed an appeal (of two decisions) following the ruling of the instant court which was asked to determine the validity of a registered trademark by the first defendant.
Despite both parties agreeing to amend the claim and there being no need therefore for the court to make a pronouncement on the decision of the Deputy Registrar of the Belize Intellectual Property Office (BELIPO) to grant trademark registration to the first defendant, the trial judge ordered that registration was invalid as it was contrary to s. 37(4) of the Trade Marks Act, Chap. 257 (“the Act”).
The argument was that opposition to the registration of the trademark was abandoned and the Deputy Registrar proceeded to grant the registration of the mark. The instant court was of the view, that there was still an obligation on the Deputy Registrar to comply with s. 37(4) of the Act even where the opposition was discontinued.
The Supreme Court noted that it was the duty of the first defendant to prove that the registration was proper and legal as the instant court was (a) entitled to make the order according to the s. 28 of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act and under the Supreme Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2005 and (b) would have been neglecting in its duty and possibly keeping the door open for future litigation if it did not decide on the question of trademark validity.
The application for leave was denied as the applicant failed to show that an error was made, as required in the case of James Wang v Atlantic Insurance Co. Ltd. (Action No. 114 of 1988).
Cases referred: James Wang v. Atlantic Insurance Co. Ltd. (Action No. 114 of 1988); Corozal Timber Company Limited v Daniel Moreno No. 280 of 2009