The Gazette 1975

ploy or use it for the purposec of the Housing Act 1966

either immediately or in the future. There is nothing

in the Act which prevents a statutory housing auth-

ority like Cobh U.D.C. from using the land which

they already hold, notwithstanding a failure on their

part to prepare a building programme.

Th e needs of housing authorities must necessarity

vary from authority to authority, depending on local

circumstances. The Minister has an overall supervisory

function in the matter. There is not in the Housing

Act anything which restricts a housing authority from

carrying out the purposes of the Act unless and until

they have already drawn up a building programme.

Here there is simple evidence upon which the Minister

could hold that 'the land sought to be acquired was

being acquired for the purposes of the Act. The Min-

ister would not be entitled to turn down an application

only because there was no building progrrmme in

existence. There was no reason to criticise the Inspector

for allegedly not following the rules of Natural Justice

as he was not aware of the effect of the judgments in

Killiney

Development

Association

and in

Geraghty

the Minister

(No. 2). The appeal is accordingly allowed.

Russell and Another v Minister for Local Gov-

ernment and Cobh Nrban District Council—

Supreme Court (O'Higgins, C. J., Walsh and

Griffin JJ. per Walsh J.—unreported—31 July,

1975).

Injunction granted on ground of deception in

passing-off action.

The plaintiffs are an unlimited English company,

and an unlimited Irish subsidiary company. The first

defendants are a limited Irish company and two sub-

scribers to that company. The second defendants are

an Irish limited company, and the same two subscribers.

No ne of the defendants gave evidence.

C. & A. Modes carries on business as retailers of

mens, womens and childrens superstores in 64 locat-

ions in Britain, and one in Belfast. The first named

plaintiff does not own any retail shop in Ireland, and

the second-named plaintiff has not traded since its

incorporation. T h e manager of the Belfast C & A

Store proved that up to 1969 a very substantial and

regular custom from the Republic was enjoyed by this

store, particularly on the Thursday excursions. A site

was purchased in Mary Street, Dublin, in 1972, with

a possible view to opening a store there. From photo-

graphs submitted, it is evident that C & A (Water-

ford) Ltd. carry the same symbol on their premises as

C & A Modes Ltd. in Belfast. There was correspondence

between the plaintiffs and the defendants in March and

April, 1973, indicating that the registration of the

defendant companies would inevitably give rise to con-

fusion, and asking them to change their name. De-

fendant's solicitor replied on 27 April that the com-

panies were not similar, as the plaintiffs were unlimited

companies and the defendants limited ones. It was held

that the defendants used the symbols C & A i

the

hope that people would inevitably cause confusion.

Th e fundamental ingredients of the action for pass-

ing-off are that the plaintiff has a name applicable to

his goods or business which is known to the public

in the area in which the defendant seeks to carry on

his business to an extent that the name, brand or

mark proposed to be used or being used by the de-

fendant is likely to deceive and cause confusion. It is

not necessary to imply the recognition of territorial

boundaries. Finlay P. is satisfied that the fact that

there is no retail outlet or agency within the Republic

owned or operated by the plaintiff, is no bar to their

action for passing-off. Finlay P. is also satisfied that

there was a probability that the lettering used by the

defendants on their van is likely to cause confusion

with the business of the plaintiffs, and that there w?s

an intention by the defendants to deceive by associating

their business in the minds of the people with the bus-

iness of the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs are therefore en-

titled to the appropriate injunctions to prevent any

continuation or repetition of the acts of passing-off, but

they are not entitled to any damages.

(C & A Modes and C & A Finance Ltd. v C &

A (Waterford Ltd., OToole and McClure—Finlay

P.—unreported—9 June, 1975).

Appointments

Mr. Nevin Griffith, Barrister-at-Law, has keen

appointed Registrar of Titles and of Deeds

in succession to the late Mr. A. J. O'Dwyer

Mr. Brendan Kiernan has been appointed as the

Irish representative of the European Com-

mission of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

Mr. Michael Murphy has been appointed Legal

Adviser to the Department of Local Govern-

ment in succession to Mr. Kiernan.

.209