JUDGMENT
Adlin Abdul Majid J:
A. Introduction
[1] The appellant filed two originating summonses by way of WA-24IP-28-07-2024 ("OS 28") and WA-24IP-29-07-2024 ("OS 29"), seeking to set aside the decisions of the respondent, dismissing the appellant's applications to register its trademark. As the trademark which is the subject matter of OS 28 and OS 29 is the same, both actions were heard together.
[2] After considering documentary evidence before the court and hearing counsel's submissions, the court dismissed the originating summonses. The reasons for the decision are set out below.
B. Background Facts
[3] On 27 July 2017, the appellant filed the following trademark applications for the mark, "SUGAR FREE" ("Appellant's Mark"):
a. Trademark application no 2017007923 under Class 5 for goods being, "Herbal preparation medicinal drinks, pharmaceutical preparations, effervescent tablets & powders, softgel capsule, health supplements and all included in Class 5"; and
b. Trademark application no 2017007922 under Class 29 for goods being, "Meat, fish, poultry and game; Meat extracts; Preserved, frozen, dried and cooked fruits and vegetables; Jellies, jams, compotes; Eggs; Milk and milk products; Edible oils and fats; All included in class 29",
(collectively, the "Appellant's Applications").
[4] On 1 December 2017, the respondent objected to the Appellant's Applications, and after hearing the appellant's submissions, dismissed the applications on 8 September 2020. The grounds of the respondent's decisions were issued on 13 May 2024.
[5] The appellant filed OS 28 and OS 29, seeking to set aside the respondent's decisions.
[6] The respondent's decisions are based on the provisions of the Trade Marks Act 1976 ("TMA 1976"), as the Appellant's Applications and the respondent's oppositions were filed and heard before the enforcement of the Trademarks Act 2019.