SUPREME COURT.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1818, 2 August 1913, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

DEVICE ON GINGER ALE BOTTLES. "FOUNTAIN & CIRCLES." THE TRADE MARKS OF TWO FIRMS. Trade marks bulked largely in an action which was Hoard in tbo Supreme Court yesterday morning, "before Mr. Justice Sim. This was a case in which Scihweppes, Ltd., asked for an injunction to restrain Thomson, Lewis and Co. from using a trado mark, which Scliweppes alleged infringed a registered mark in use by them. Mr. C. P. Skerrett, K.C., with Mr. W. H. D. Bell, appeared for Schweppes, Ltd., while Mr. C. B. Morison, K.C., with Mr. A. do B. Brandon, junr., appeared for defendants. Scliweppes, Ltd., aro aerated water and ginger ulo manufacturers,'of London, and Thomson, Lewis and Co. are aerated water manufacturers of Wellington. According to tho stateiiient of ■ claim, Scliweppes, Ltd., had a distinctive label in respect of ginger ale. Part of this label consisted of a deviw of a fountain enclosed in two concentric circles—tho whole in the form of a red seal. For many years Schweppes, Ltd., bad used the trado mark on goods manufactured by them. It was alleged that, for some time past, Thomson. Lewis and Co. had distributed large quantities u£ ginger ale (manufactured by them) in bottles bearing labels, which infringed the trade mark of Schweppes, Ltd. By 'reason of such infringements. Thomson, Lowis and Co. had deceived tho public, and Schweppes, Ltd., had suffered. loss. By way of defence, Thomson, Lewis and Co. denied that the ginger ale sold by Schweppes, Ltd., was generally known by its trade mark, and denied that the labels used by them (Thomson, Lewis and Co.) constituted infringements of any of Schweppes's trado marks. Tho labels in question wcro supplied by an English firm, and were "stock" labels sold liv that firm to anyone requiring them. Thomson, Lewis and Co. further said that tho design of their trado mark had been altered in order to meet tho wishes of Schweppes, Ltd., and to avoid- litigation, tho condition being that Schweppes, Ltd., should pay costs of the action up to that date. Evidence was called on both 6idos yesterday, but argument was not concluded and tho hearing will be resumed ' this morning.

FAMILY & ESTATE.

WEEN DID MINOR'S SHAffiE VEST? In tlm Supremo Court yesterday 'morning, Mr. Justice Chapman - dealt with a question arising out of tho will of the Into Alfred Henry Price, sheepfarmer, of Tangarewa, Takapan, Hawke's Bay. The plaintiffs in the action wcro Charles Henry St. Hill, sheepfarmer, of Porangahau, and Frank White, sheepfarmer, of Tane, trustees of the will of the deceased. Tho defendants were Frederick Ashton Price, sheepfarmer, of Takapau j three daughters of deceased (Mabel Nelson, Ellen Gertrudo White, and Marthanna Price); and five sons of the deceased (Arthur Edward Price, Thos. Godfrey Price, John Price, Harold Mason Price, and ArTinl/1 Miicnn PrJ/ml

.Alfred Henry Price died on Jnne 1, 1901, leaving tlio bulk of lii.s personal property to his widow, awl. liis real estato, "to the trustee?, who wero to administer the estate as directed until the youngest surviving child of testator Attained the ago of 21 years, when distribution would take place in a manner specified. In August, 190S, his Honour had tho will before him, whon ho heard an originating summons to determino the rights of parties and settle questions as to tho duties of trustees., These questions were raised on tho application of one of the sons to obtain an advance on his expectant share. In dealing with this .matter, his Honour determined that the shares of tho 'beneficiaries vested at least as early as tho youngest surviving child should attain the age of 21. The question aa to whether the shares vested at an earlier date (say, for instance, at tho death of testator) was reserved for argument should it requiro to be decided. Since then the dentil of one of the infant children (Arnold Mason Price) has rendered a decision on tho point necessary, and argument was addressed to his Honour yesterday. Mr. H. A. Cornford. of Napier, appear-

Mr. H. A. Cornford. of Napier, appeared for tho trustees; Mr. J. H. G. Murdoch, of Napier, represented the beneficiaries designated by the will; to whom lie contended tho share of the deceased infant must pass: Mr. E. F. Hadfield argued on behalf of tho next of kin of the deceased infant. His Honour reserved decision.