WILLIAM DIMECH Vs. GOFFREDO ALESSANDRO CHRETIEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case the appellant (one William Dimech) sued Goffredo Alossandro Chretien and Giovanni Cilia La Carte (who carried on business in partnership under the style or firm of "Chretien and Co."), for an order restraining them from using the firm name "Chretien and Co.," and other relief, the plaintiff reserving his right of action against the defendants for damages.

(2.) The action was heard in His Majesty's Commercial Court for the Island of Malta and its dependencies, and by an order of 19 November 1926, it was declared "that the use o? the said firm name on the part of the defendants constituted an act of unfair competition as regard the art of typography and is regards stationary;" and the order was made restraining the defendants from using the said firm name in the practice of the art of typography and in the sale of stationery. An order for the destruction of certain cards and articles bearing the said firm name was also made; and each party was ordered to bear his own costs.

(3.) The defendants appealed to His Majesty's Court of appeal for the Island of Malta and its dependencies, and by an order of that Court pronounced on 7 May 1928, the order of 19 November 1926, was reversed, except as to costs. Each party had to bear his own costs of the appeal. The plaintiff claimed to be entitled to appeal to His Majesty in Council as of right, upon the ground that the matter in dispute on the appeal was (as required by R. 2 of the Rules regulating all appeals to His Majesty in Council from the Island of Malta and its dependencies) of the value of five hundred pounds sterling or upwards or that the appeal involved directly or indirectly some claim or question of the value of five hundred 'pounds sterling or upwards. He accordingly applied to the said Court of appeal in the usual way. On 5 November 1928, that Court, notwithstanding opposition on the part of the defendants, made an order giving leave to appeal, and fixing times and security. This order contains a recital in the following terms: "Whereas it is to be remarked that regard being had to the importance of the business carried on by the plaintiff, his interest to prevent competition on the part of the defendant firm as claimed in the writ of summons could affect him to the extent of five hundred pounds sterling or upwards."