Clause 25

by deleting subsection (4) and substituting the following subsection:“(4) Notwithstanding anything in subsections (1), (2) and (3), a trade mark shall not be, or be deemed to have been, assignable or transmissible in a case in which, as a result of an assignment or transmission, there would in the circumstances subsist, or have subsisted, whether under the common law or by registration, exclusive rights in more than one of the persons concerned to the use, in relation to —

the same goods or services;

the same description of goods or services; or

goods and services or descriptions of goods and services which are associated with each other,of trade marks nearly resembling each other or of identical trade marks, if, having regard to the similarity of the goods or services, or the same description of goods or services, or the association of the goods and services or descriptions of goods and services, and to the similarity of the trade marks, the use of the trade marks in exercise of those rights would be or have been likely to deceive or cause confusion:Provided that, where a trade mark is or has been assigned or transmitted in such a case as aforesaid, the assignment or transmission shall not be deemed to be or to have been invalid under this subsection if the exclusive rights subsisting as a result thereof in the persons concerned respectively are or were, having regard to limitations imposed thereon, such as not to be exercisable by two or more of those persons in relation to —

goods to be sold or otherwise traded in within Singapore (otherwise than for export);

goods to be exported to the same market outside Singapore;

services for use in Singapore;

services for use in the same country or territory outside Singapore; or

services available for acceptance in Singapore (wherever they are to be used).”;

by deleting the word “and” in the seventh line of subsection (5) and substituting the words “or services or the association of the goods and services or descriptions of goods and services and to the similarity”; and

by deleting subsections (6) and (7) and substituting the following subsection:“(6) Notwithstanding anything in subsections (1), (2) and (3), a trade mark shall not be assignable or transmissible in a case in which as a result of an assignment or transmission thereof there would in the circumstances subsist, whether under the common law or by registration —

an exclusive right in one of the persons concerned to the use of the mark limited to use in relation to goods to be sold or otherwise traded in, or to services for use or available for acceptance in a place or places in Singapore; and

an exclusive right in another of the persons concerned to the use of a mark identical with or nearly resembling the mark referred to in paragraph (a) in relation to —

the same goods or services;

the same description of goods or services; or

goods and services or descriptions of goods or services which are associated with each other,limited to use in relation to goods to be sold, or otherwise traded in, or services for use, or available for acceptance, in another place or places in Singapore:Provided that, on application in the prescribed manner by the proprietor of a trade mark who proposes to assign it, or of a person who claims that such a mark has been transmitted to him or to a predecessor in title of his, in any such case, the Registrar, if he is satisfied that in all the circumstances the use of the trade mark in exercise of the said rights would not be contrary to the public interest, may approve the assignment or transmission and an assignment or transmission so approved shall not be deemed to be, or to have been, invalid under this subsection or subsection (4) so, however, that in the case of a registered trade mark this provision shall not have effect unless application for the registration under section 43 of the title of the person becoming entitled is made within 6 months from the date on which the approval is given or, in the case of a transmission, was made before that date.”.