Name claim in dispute

Michele Coker registered the name 'Lion Nathan Limited', a company best known for brewing beer. Photo / Herald on Sunday

A Hamilton property investor has run up against the might of brewer Lion Nathan after registering the name "Lion Nathan Limited" with the Companies Office.

Michele Coker spotted that the now-Japanese owned brewer had relinquished the name in 2000.

She had heard about Kirin Brewery's full takeover of Lion Nathan last year. "So I thought, oh bugger it, I'll take it. It's a good name, it's a good brand."

She reserved the name and registered the company officially in September.

"Then I get a call from a lawyer wanting to know what I was going to be using it for."

The maker of well-known brands such as Steinlager, Speight's and Lion Red told her "basically they want the name back", she said, and she would be receiving a letter.

Coker said she didn't want the name for anything to do with the liquor industry. Instead she had a charitable trust working to provide housing for low-income families and she wanted to set up a finance company to help people get into homes.

She has also registered the name Lion Nathan Finance.

Coker said she hadn't taken any legal advice but as far as she was concerned she had a right to the name. "The Companies Office said I can have it, so I can have it.

"[Lion Nathan] can drive this bus, I'll just see where they want to take it, basically."

Corporate affairs director Neil Hinton said Lion Nathan had contacted Coker to "check for awareness" that its name was a well-known one, and to find out what her motivations were. The brewer hadn't made any decisions about whether to pursue the matter.

"It just seems to be a pretty unusual step for somebody to be taking. We're intrigued at this stage."

It still had a number of New Zealand-registered companies incorporating the Lion Nathan name, but it streamlined these periodically, he said.

Damon Butler, a partner with law firm AJ Park, said the corporate had good legal legs to stand on. The right to a name was based on use or registration, whichever came first.

"The mere incorporation of a company name does not actually give you the right to use that name. Lion have significant common law or unregistered rights in that name based on the historic use that they've made of it."

The company also had registered trademarks in the Lion Nathan name.

In addition, there was a body of law that said a threat to use a name essentially was the same as using it.

The Registrar of Companies used to perform more of a policing role but now it would register any name as long as it was not identical to that of another company. From there it was up to the prior rights holders to fight it out under trademark law, he said.

Lion Nathan could not force Coker to give up the company but it could get her to change the name.

She would be "skating on thin ice" if the brewer decided to enforce its rights, Butler said.

Last month, the Intellectual Property Office of New Zealand (Iponz) decided in favour of Kiwi boutique Ruby Apparel, which had complained about Australian Rubi Shoes registering its trademark here.

Iponz ruled the Rubi Shoes trademark was likely to confuse consumers.