INJUNCTION SOUGHT

Hokitika Guardian, 29 April 1931, Page 2

INJUNCTION SOUGHT

USE OF WORD “MAJESTIC” IN TITLE. WELLINGTON, April 27. On the ground that considerable inconvenience and confusion had been caused by the similarity of names, the Aiaj?fitic Restaurant, Ltd., restaurant proprietors carrying on business at 35 Willis Street, applied in the Supreme Court to-day fur an injunction restraining Wellington Tea Rooms, Ltd., proprietors of a restaurant in the Majestic Theatre building, from using the word “Alajcstic” in connection with its business. .

The plaintiff company claimed that when it acquired the business at 35 Willis Street in 1927, no other business of a similar name or nature was in existence in the street. Tile defendant company commenced business in the Alajefstic Theatre building about the middle of 1929 and its conduct had been calculated to deceive the public into thinking its business was that of plaintiff. It was pleaded on behalf of the defendant, company* that plaintiff had no exclusive right to use the word “Majestic.” Public notice of defendant’s intention to was given in December, and it wrfl claimed that plaintiff liad'lost any right there might have beeilf'by its acquiescence and unreasonable delay in bringing proceedings. Argument is proceeding.

After hearing lengthy legal argument his Honor said be was satisfied that no proper inquiries had been made by the defendant company before adopting the name. Inconvenience and confusion resulted. In the particular circumstances he would grant not an injunction, but damaged. The plaintiffs had made an attempt at settlement and in pursuance of their offer he awarded £loo damages and twenty guineas costs.