Boss Fire and Safety PL v Fire Containment PL

Boss Fire and Safety PL (the Applicant) and Fire Containment PL (the Opponent) were before the Court concerning a dispute over trade mark rights. The Opponent alleged that the Applicant's goods were identical to its own, which were initially imported and then rebranded under the trade mark "Intu-Clamp". The Opponent also claimed to have first used the word "Firebox" in 2013 as its first trade mark, used colloquially as an alternative to "Intu-CLAMP".

The Court was required to determine the admissibility of late-filed evidence from both parties. The Applicant sought to introduce a further declaration and evidence relating to the grant of an innovation patent for its product, arguing it was relevant to rebut allegations of copying. The Opponent also sought to file a further declaration, claiming it was relevant to the issues in dispute and merely "refreshing" existing evidence. The Court also considered the Applicant's blanket claim to confidentiality over its evidence.

The Court, acknowledging it was not bound by strict rules of evidence but could be informed in a way it reasonably believed appropriate under regulation 21.15(4) of the Trade Marks Regulations 1995, considered the late-filed material. It found that both the Applicant's and the Opponent's late-filed material possessed some probative value. Consequently, the Court decided to have regard to this material, while noting that the weight to be attached to it was a separate consideration. The Court also addressed the Applicant's confidentiality claim, proceeding to provide its findings without divulging confidential material.