28/09/2022
Just 3 months after the official celebrations of her Platinum Jubilee, the death of Queen Elizabeth brought the second Elizabethan era for Britain to an end.
In another indication the reign of King Charles III has officially begun, his new royal cypher has now been unveiled on 27 September 2022. Although this cypher is the King’s personal property, it will appear on government buildings, traditional police helmets, state documents, new passports and any post boxes built after his reign began.
This cypher is uniquely associated with King Charles III and therefore cannot be inherited by a future monarch. This is why it is the King’s personal property. However, there are other trade marks which are connected to a “royal” title rather than uniquely identifying a particular person who bears that title. In such cases, the rights are not usually owned by the individual who currently bears the title, since otherwise a change of ownership might need to be recorded every time a new heir succeeds to the title. For example, the Duchy of Lancaster is owned by the sovereign, so King Charles automatically inherited this on the death of the Queen. However, no change of ownership needs to be recorded for UK Registration No UK00003010412 DUCHY OF LANCASTER / THE DUCHY OF LANCASTER (Series of 2), which is owned by The Solicitor for the Affairs of the Duchy of Lancaster. Similarly, the Duchy of Cornwall is passed to the heir to the throne, so the Duchy transferred to Prince William when his father became King. UK Registration No UK00002379665 DUCHY OF CORNWALL / THE DUCHY OF CORNWALL (Series of 2) is in the name of Choughs Nominees Limited, so again no change of owner needs to be recorded.
In addition to specific trade marks relating to “royal” titles, there are also the provisions of the Trade Marks Act 1994 that relate to specially protected emblems. Section 4 (1) of the Act provides that:
“A trade mark which consists of or contains—
(a) the Royal arms, or any of the principal armorial bearings of the Royal arms, or any insignia or device so nearly resembling the Royal arms or any such armorial bearing as to be likely to be mistaken for them or it,
(b) a representation of the Royal crown or any of the Royal flags,
(c) a representation of Her Majesty or any member of the Royal family, or any colourable imitation thereof, or
(d) words, letters or devices likely to lead persons to think that the applicant either has or recently has had Royal patronage or authorisation,
shall not be registered unless it appears to the registrar that consent has been given by or on behalf of Her Majesty or, as the case may be, the relevant member of the Royal family.”
At some stage the wording of this Act will be amended to refer to “His Majesty” instead of “Her Majesty”, but no other amendments are expected.
Section 4 (1) (d) of the Act would apply to any trade mark which includes a suggestion that the mark has the “Royal Warrant”. Some 800 or so products which have had the “Royal Warrant” under Queen Elizabeth II will now need to reapply for the right to use the royal coat of arms on their packaging. This applies to household names like Heinz, Cadbury, Nestlé, Boots and Coca Cola. They will have two years to discontinue use of Her Majesty’s Royal Arms and will need to re-apply if they wish to continue using the Royal Arms of Charles III. For their application to succeed, companies or businesses will need to show that they have supplied “products or services on a regular and on-going basis to the Royal Households of Grantor/s for not less than five years out of the past seven”, and also that they have policies and action plans around the environment and sustainability.
The team at Reddie & Grose, together with our clients, has mourned the passing of Her Majesty the Queen. Queen Elizabeth II was our head of state and our rock especially in troubled times. She will be remembered for her dedication to the service of her people in the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth.
We extend our best wishes to His Majesty King Charles III.
This article is for general information only. Its content is not a statement of the law on any subject and does not constitute advice. Please contact Reddie & Grose LLP for advice before taking any action in reliance on it.
