McCain International v Country Fair Foods [1981] RPC 69
Claimant introduced new product into UK: chips that could be cooked in oven. Sold product under name ‘McCain Oven Chips’.
Year later Defendant introduced their own version of product which they sold as ‘Birds Eye Oven Chips’.
Claimant alleged passing off. Defendant alleged “Oven Chips” was descriptive and therefore Claimant could not have monopoly over it.
Held
Name has no secondary meaning where it simply informs customers what the nature of the product is.
-
Thus:
“McCain” indicated the source of the product
“Oven Chips” merely indicated the nature of the product
-
I.e. important factor in case seemed to be that McCain had put their own brand name in front of phrase “oven chips”
Thus was inferred that they knew term “oven chips” was descriptive, and that they felt the need to distinguish themselves
Case might have been decided differently if McCain had simply sold product as “Oven Chips”
Similar cases
Ambitious and intelligent students
choose Oxbridge Notes.
- Customer Support
- Sellers FAQ
- Contact Us
- Privacy Policy
- Terms and Conditions
©2024 Oxbridge Notes. All right reserved.