Trade mark owners now have an extra tool to protect trade marks derived from their trade names, with the advent of recent amendments to the laws governing the registration of companies and businesses in Singapore.
As from 13 January 2003, the Registrar of Companies and Businesses ("the Registrar") no longer checks for similar names before a proposed company or business name is approved for registration. The onus is on the applicant for the company or business name to ensure that the proposed name does not resemble the name of another.
Under the amended law, the Registrar will reject a proposed name if the name is
- identical to another;
- undesirable; or
- of a kind the Minister has directed the Registrar not to accept.
This is encapsulated in section 27(1) of the amended Companies Act (Cap. 50) ("CA")and section 11(1) of the amended Business Registration Act (Cap. 32) ("BRA") respectively, and are powers that were vested in the Registrar under the previous law as well.
The significant feature of the legislative amendment is that the Registrar will also have the discretion to direct a change of name upon application by a third party if the Registrar is satisfied that a valid complaint has been made out under the grounds of rejection (i), (ii) or (ii) above, or that the name "so nearly resembles the name of another company or corporation or a business name as to be likely to be mistaken for it" (section 27(2) of the CA and section 11(4) of the BRA).
The reference to a "corporation" extends to foreign companies not registered in Singapore, which means that the complainant does not need to have a place of business or carry on business in Singapore.
However, potential complainants seeking to stop a competitor or other person from operating under a confusingly similar company or business name should note that this avenue of challenge expires within 12 months of registration of the offending company of business name, or by 13 January 2004 in the case of companies or businesses incorporated or registered prior to 13 January 2003.
The amendments provide an additional channel to trade mark owners to review their trade mark portfolios with a view to seeking any possible redress. Having said that, although the amendments appear broad in terms of their potential scope of application, it remains to be seen how the Registrar’s discretion would be exercised and to what extent trade mark owners would actually benefit.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.