Al Mahamid v Global Tobacco: Trade Mark Invalidation for Cigarette Brand 'Manchester'

In Jamal Abdulnaser Mahmoud Al Mahamid v Global Tobacco Manufacturers (International) Sdn Bhd, the High Court of Singapore heard a case regarding the invalidation of the Defendant's trade mark for 'Manchester' cigarettes. The Plaintiff, having registered his 'Manchester' mark earlier, sought to invalidate the Defendant's mark based on similarity, passing-off, bad faith, and the mark being well-known. The court found the marks similar and likely to cause confusion, thus invalidating the Defendant's trade mark. The court rejected the Plaintiff's claims of passing-off, bad faith, and the mark being well-known. The Plaintiff's claim was for invalidation under s 23 of the Trade Marks Act.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Trade Mark No. T1208253B for “Manchester and M device” registered in Class 34 in the name of the Defendant is declared invalid under s 23(3)(a)(i) read with s 8(2)(b) of the Act.

1.3 Case Type

Intellectual Property

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

The High Court invalidated Global Tobacco's 'Manchester' cigarette trade mark due to similarity and likelihood of confusion with Al Mahamid's earlier mark.

1.7 Decision Date

10 February 2015

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
Global Tobacco Manufacturers (International) Sdn Bhd	Defendant	Corporation	Trade Mark Invalidation	Lost	Goh En-Ci Gloria of Allen & Glenhill LLP Clara Tung Yi Lin of Allen & Glenhill LLP Stanley Lai Tze Chang of Allen & Glenhill LLP
Jamal Abdulnaser Mahmoud Al Mahamid	Plaintiff	Individual	Trade Mark Invalidation Granted	Won	Foo Maw Jiun of Rodyk & Davidson LLP Quek Jie Ying of Rodyk & Davidson LLP Yew Woon Chooi of Rodyk & Davidson LLP

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Aedit Abdullah	Judicial Commissioner	Yes

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
Goh En-Ci Gloria	Allen & Glenhill LLP
Clara Tung Yi Lin	Allen & Glenhill LLP
Stanley Lai Tze Chang	Allen & Glenhill LLP
Foo Maw Jiun	Rodyk & Davidson LLP
Quek Jie Ying	Rodyk & Davidson LLP
Yew Woon Chooi	Rodyk & Davidson LLP

4. Facts

Plaintiff registered the 'Manchester' trade mark in Singapore in 2005.
Defendant registered the 'Manchester' trade mark in Singapore in 2012.
Plaintiff's cigarettes are sold duty-free, usually to chandlers serving ships arriving in Singapore.
Defendant is a Malaysian company manufacturing cigarettes, selling mostly in Malaysia.
Defendant launched its 'Manchester' brand of cigarettes in Malaysia in 2008.
Plaintiff sought invalidation of the Defendant’s mark.
The marks are in respect of identical goods, namely cigarettes.

5. Formal Citations

Jamal Abdulnaser Mahmoud Al Mahamid v Global Tobacco Manufacturers (International) Sdn Bhd, Originating Summons 421 of 2014, [2015] SGHC 42
Jamal Abdulnaser Mahmoud Al Mahamid v Global Tobacco Manufacturers (International) Sdn Bhd, Civil Appeal No 51 of 2015, [2015] SGCA 51

6. Timeline

Date	Event
2005-06-07	Plaintiff's mark registered in Singapore
2008-01-01	Defendant launched its “Manchester” brand of cigarettes in Malaysia
2010-01-01	Plaintiff's mark first used in Singapore
2012-01-01	Defendant decided to expand its business into Singapore
2012-11-29	Defendant’s mark given a certificate of registration in Singapore
2012-11-01	Defendant’s cigarettes have been sold in Singapore
2014-01-01	Plaintiff commenced proceedings seeking invalidation of the Defendant’s mark
2015-02-11	Judgment reserved
2015-09-29	Appeal to this decision in Civil Appeal No 51 of 2015 was dismissed by the Court of Appeal

7. Legal Issues

Trade Mark Infringement
- Outcome: The court found that the marks were similar and there was a likelihood of confusion, thus invalidating the Defendant's trade mark.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
  - Similarity of marks
  - Likelihood of confusion
- Related Cases:
  - [2010] 1 SLR 382
  - [2014] 1 SLR 911
  - [2013] 2 SLR 941
Passing Off
- Outcome: The court found insufficient evidence of goodwill to support a claim of passing off.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
  - [2009] 3 SLR(R) 216
Bad Faith Registration
- Outcome: The court found no bad faith in the Defendant's registration of its mark.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
  - [2009] 2 SLR(R) 814
Well-Known Trade Mark
- Outcome: The court found insufficient evidence that the Plaintiff's mark was well-known in Singapore.
- Category: Substantive

8. Remedies Sought

Invalidation of Trade Mark

9. Cause of Actions

Trade Mark Invalidation

10. Practice Areas

Trade Mark Invalidation
Intellectual Property Litigation

11. Industries

Tobacco

12. Cited Cases

Case Name	Court	Affirmed	Citation	Jurisdiction	Significance
City Chain Stores (S) Pte Ltd v Louis Vuitton Malletier	High Court	Yes	[2010] 1 SLR 382	Singapore	Cited for the interpretation of s 27(1) of the Act, a provision which is similar to s 8(1).
Staywell Hospitality Group Pty Ltd v Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc. and another and another appeal	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2014] 1 SLR 911	Singapore	Cited for the step-by-step methodology in assessing similarity of marks, identity or similarity of goods or services, and the likelihood of confusion arising therefrom.
Hai Tong Co (Pte) Ltd v Ventree Singapore Pte Ltd and another and another appeal	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2013] 2 SLR 941	Singapore	Cited for the approach to be adopted in assessing whether marks are similar.
British American Tobacco (Brands) Inc. v Phillip Morris Products S A	Intellectual Property Office of Singapore	Yes	[2012] SGIPOS 7	Singapore	Cited for the Registrar's consideration of the nature of the marketplace and environment in deciding the matter in respect of an issue under s 7(1)(b) of the Act.
N.V. Sumatra Tobacco Trading Company v British American Tobacco (Brands) Inc.	Intellectual Property Office of Singapore	Yes	[2008] SGIPOS 2	Singapore	Cited for the Registrar's emphasis on the aural cues of the mark when considering the likelihood of confusion under s 8(2)(b) of the Act.
The Polo/Lauren Co, LP v Shop In Department Store Pte Ltd	High Court	Yes	[2006] 2 SLR(R) 690	Singapore	Cited for factors that are germane to determining whether there is a likelihood of confusion.
Novelty Pte Ltd v Amanresorts Ltd and another	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2009] 3 SLR(R) 216	Singapore	Cited for the requirements to establish a claim for passing off.
The Commissioners of Inland Revenue v Muller & Co’s Margarine, Limited	House of Lords	Yes	[1901] AC 217	United Kingdom	Cited for the definition of goodwill.
Wing Joo Loong Ginseng Hong (Singapore) Co Pte Ltd v Qinghai Xinyuan Foreign Trade Co Ltd and another and another appeal	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2009] 2 SLR(R) 814	Singapore	Cited for the definition of bad faith.
Weir Warman Ltd v Research & Development Pty Ltd	High Court	Yes	[2007] 2 SLR(R) 1073	Singapore	Cited as an example of situations which are different from the present case regarding bad faith.
Festina Lotus SA v Romanson Co Ltd	High Court	Yes	[2010] 4 SLR 552	Singapore	Cited as an example of situations which are different from the present case regarding bad faith.
Baywatch Production Co. Inc v The Home Video Channel	High Court	Yes	[1997] FSR 22	England and Wales	Cited as authority for the proposition that absence of evidence of confusion is significant.
McDonald’s Corp v Future Enterprises Pte Ltd	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2005] 1 SLR(R) 177	Singapore	Cited for the proposition that aural similarity could be overridden at the point of sale by other factors, rendering confusion unlikely.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute Name	Jurisdiction
Trade Marks Act (Cap 332, 2005 Rev Ed)	Singapore
s 23(3)(a)(i) of the Trade Marks Act	Singapore
s 8(2)(b) of the Trade Marks Act	Singapore
s 23(3)(b) of the Trade Marks Act	Singapore
s 8(7)(a) of the Trade Marks Act	Singapore
s 23(1) of the Trade Marks Act	Singapore
s 7(6) of the Trade Marks Act	Singapore
s 23(3)(a)(iii) of the Trade Marks Act	Singapore
s 8(4) of the Trade Marks Act	Singapore
s 2(7) of the Trade Marks Act	Singapore
s 2(8) of the Trade Marks Act	Singapore
s 2(9) of the Trade Marks Act	Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

Trade Mark
Invalidation
Manchester
Cigarettes
Likelihood of Confusion
Goodwill
Bad Faith
Passing Off
Ship Chandlers

15.2 Keywords

Trade Mark
Invalidation
Manchester
Cigarettes
Singapore

17. Areas of Law

Area Name	Relevance Score
Trademarks	90
Commercial Law	30
Contract Law	10

16. Subjects

Trade Mark Law
Intellectual Property