TRADE NAMES.

Press, Volume LXVI, Issue 20107, 10 December 1930, Page 8

TRADE NAMES.

COMPETING TAXT FIRMS.

RESERVED JUDGMENT GIVEN. "The plaintiff lias failed to satisfy mo that the defendant's trade name or Ihe window sign is calculated to deceive, Iho public as alleged/' said liis lion our Mr Justice Adams yesterday, in delivering judgment; iu the ease, Charles Seymour Trillo v. William Georgo Dis, iu which the trade designations of com peting groups of laxis woro involved. Mr C. iS. Thomas appeared at (lie bearing for the plaintiff, and Mr W. <T. iStacey for the defendant. His .Honour's judgment was as follows: — "The plaintiff asks for an injunction restraining the defendant;, and his agents or servants from ilnitating the get-up of the plaintiff's taxis, and requiring him to refrain from using the words 'Gold Crown Taxis' in connexion with his business. At the hearing the plaintiff abandoned the first part of his claim, and the complaint is now confined to the, use of the word 'Gold' in the defendant's trade name. Plaintiff's Case. "The parties are engaged in competing businesses as taxi proprietors plying for hire in Christchurch. The plaintiff commenced business in 1929. His cars were distinguished by a yellow band running along the sides and back and by the nam.' 'Gold Band Taxis,' and his cars became generally known as the 'Gold Band' taxis. In August, 1030, the defendant, and six other drivers left the plaintiff's service and formed an unlegistered association for the purpose of currying on a business similar in all respects to that of the plaintiff. It does not appear that they were partners, but they had one office in common with a person iu attendance to answer telephone and other calls. They adopted as their trade name the words 'Gold i*rown Taxis,' and this name appears 011 their cars surmounted with tlie device of a crown in bronze. In the supplementary telephone list the name is entered as 'Gold Crown Taxis' in capital letters, and if this application •'ails the name will appear in the next telephone list u idc-r the letter •' G' in juxtaposition with the trade name of the plaintiff. It is admitted that there is no other resemblance in the get-up of the respective cars, rind that no one looking at one of the defendant's cars could fail to observe the difference by dav or night. The plaintiff's case therefore rests on an advertisement inserted three tini>.s in . the Christchurch 'Star' on August 20t.h and repeated twice in the same newspaper within a week, a sign on the window of the defendant's office nil the first floor of the Regent Theatre building in Cathedral square, and lettering on the lamps, and evidence relating to telephone—calls to the plaintiff's office. Gold Crown Sign. "The advertisement reads:—'Who are the Gold Crown Taxis? Why! Ex-Gold Band drivers on their own—'Phono 37It is in my opinion a clear statement that the defendant and his associates arc carrying on a business of their own under that name entirely separate from tho business of the plaintiff. The window sign is in four lines—Gold— Taxis—'Phone 37-755, with a design of a crown in the centre of tho window, the word 'Gold' being on the top line, the crown immediately below, and 'Taxis' and telephone number below the crown. The sign is clearly visible from the Square, and the crown is promiuent and must strike the eye of persons looking at, the sign. There is no evidence that anyone has taken the sign for the plaintiff's and I do not think any intelligent person would so take it. "The evidence in relation to telephone calls does not carry the matter further. The evidence of the plaintiff's manager shows only that he has received enquiries, Ms that the Gold Crown?' and has answered 'Xo, Gold Band,' and that sometimes lie may have got the job and other times the reply lias been: 'We don't want you.' Jt is obvious by tho very terms of his enquiry that tho person calling knew what he wanted but, as commonly happens, had connected with the wrong number. The mistako may have arisen from the fact that tho defendant's name appears only in the supplementary telephone list printed on the first page, but it is certain that tho enquirer differentiated between the 'Gold Band' and 'Gold Crown' ears, and his question shows that ho was nut confusing one with the other. The manager does not say that lie received more than one such call. "The plaintiff has failed to satisfy me that the defendant's trade name or the window sign is calculated to deceive the public as alleged. "Judgment, will bo entered for the defendant with costs ,-£2 l; disbursements and witnesses' expenses to be fixed by the Registrar."