Unilever PLC v Damien Amos

This matter concerned an opposition by Unilever PLC (the Opponent) to the registration of a trade mark by Damien Amos (the Applicant). The dispute arose from the Opponent's objection to evidence filed by the Applicant in reply to the opposition. The Applicant contended that this evidence introduced a new argument under section 58 of the relevant Act, which had not been pleaded or particularised in the initial opposition and had not been addressed in the Opponent's evidence in support. The Applicant argued that allowing this material would result in grave injustice and be inconsistent with natural justice.

The court was required to determine whether the Opponent should be precluded from relying on the evidence filed in reply, given that it allegedly introduced a new argument not previously raised. The court also had to consider the implications of this evidence in light of the grounds on which the application for trade mark registration was opposed. The overarching legal issue was whether the admission of this evidence would offend the principles of natural justice and prejudice the Applicant's case.

The court, acting as a delegate of the Registrar, determined the objection at the hearing. The court noted that section 55 of the Act mandates the Registrar to decide whether to refuse or register a trade mark, having regard to the grounds on which the opposition was established. In this instance, the court found that the Opponent had established a ground of opposition. Consequently, the court refused to register the trade mark application.