Irish Press Ltd Irish Independent Newspapers Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Court: Supreme Court
• Judgment Date: 01 January 1938
• Date: 01 January 1938

I.F.S.]

"Independent" Newspapers, Ltd.

and

"Irish Press," Ltd

Newspaper - Assignment -Goodwill - Name of Newspaper not used by assignees - Proposed use of name after seven years by another publishing company - Tendency to deceive - Injunction - "Quia timet" action -Apprehension of injury - Proof of damage.

By a conveyance dated the 16th day of May, 1925, the "Freeman's Journal" (1919), Ltd., assigned their interest in certain leasehold premises and all the title and interest as publishers and proprietors which that company had in certain newspapers, including the "Evening Telegraph,"to the plaintiff company, who were the proprietors of several newspapers. From the date of he assignment the plaintiff company had not used the title "Evening Telegraph"for any of their newspapers and no evening paper of that name had been published. Prior to the said conveyance the plaintiff company had published an evening paper called the "Evening Herald," and they continued to issue an evening newspaper under that name. The defendant company were the printers and publishers of an evening newspaper entitled the "Evening Press," which was first published on the 3rd of June, 1932, and in the issue of that paper, dated the 16th of June, 1932, it was announced that from and after the 20th June, 1932, the "Evening Press" would be known as the "Evening Telegraph," which title had been duly registered. The plaintiff company thereupon brought an action claiming an order to restrain the defendant company from printing, publishing, selling and passing off a newspaper entitled, or to be entitled, the "Evening Telegraph" so as to induce members of the public to purchase, or to publish advertisements in, that newspaper in the belief that the said newspaper was the "Evening Telegraph"previously the property of and published by the "Freeman's Journal" (1919), Ltd., the property and goodwill in which had been acquired by the plaintiff company. Held(1) that the mere fact of a concern having ceased to use a name that had become associated with the goodwill of its business was in itself no absolute bar to a right of action for "passing off" by use of the disused name; that the dropping of a name previously used merely made it exceptionally difficult to establish the attempt to "pass off," but once the fact of "passing off" was established it was immaterial whether or not the concern had itself ceased to use the name. Leather Cloth Co., Ltd. v. American Leather Cloth Co. Ltd.,11 H. L...