In a legal clash that brings together history, culture, and commerce, the popular Indian restaurant chain Dishoom finds itself embroiled in a trademark dispute over the term ‘Ruby Murray.’ This term, steeped in 1960s cockney rhyming slang and inspired by 1950s singer Ruby Murray, has become synonymous with curry, particularly Dishoom’s famous chicken curry.
In 2019, Tariq Aziz, a London-based businessman, registered ‘Ruby Murray’ as a trademark with the Intellectual Property Office (IPO). Since then, Dishoom has been using the term to describe its signature ‘Chicken Ruby’ curry dish, a favourite among its patrons. The restaurant chain’s lawyers, however, argue that Aziz has never used the trademark commercially, a key principle in trademark law known as “use it or lose it.”
Dishoom’s legal team has submitted an application to the IPO to revoke Aziz’s trademark, asserting that it should be removed from the registry due to non-use. “We don’t believe the trademark has ever been used,” stated a Dishoom spokesperson. “We want to remove the monopoly on ‘Ruby Murray’ so it can be used freely by anyone when referring to curry.”
Aziz, on the other hand, contends that the name is actively in use for a food premises in Islington, North London, currently closed for refurbishment. “We have a premises in Islington called Ruby Murray. It’s closed for refurbishment at the moment, but will reopen soon,” Aziz said in response to the application.
The application, filed by Dishoom on May 15, gives Aziz until July 15 to defend his trademark. If he fails to do so, the trademark will be removed from the register, potentially allowing the term ‘Ruby Murray’ to be used freely in the culinary world.
This legal battle not only highlights the complexities of trademark law but also raises questions about the preservation and use of cultural terms. As the deadline approaches, the outcome of this case could set a significant precedent for how trademark law is applied to terms with historical and cultural significance.
For businesses holding trademarks they no longer use, this case serves as a crucial reminder of the importance of maintaining active use to protect trademark rights. “If you’re no longer using your trademark, why let it go to waste?” advises The Trademark Helpline, a service that assists with Trademark Registration and monitoring. “Consider licensing your trademark to others or competitors.”
The Trademark Helpline emphasises the importance of understanding rights and obligations related to trademarks, especially for those interested in trademarks that are not being actively used. Their services aim to help businesses navigate the complexities of trademark law to safeguard their intellectual property effectively, particularly focusing on Trademark UK issues.
As Dishoom and Aziz prepare for the next steps in this legal saga, the culinary and legal communities alike watch closely, recognising that the resolution will have broader implications for trademark use and cultural heritage.
Questions about this
Why did Dishoom apply to revoke the Ruby Murray trademark?
Dishoom applied to the IPO to revoke the ‘Ruby Murray’ trademark registered in 2019 by London businessman Tariq Aziz, arguing it had never been used commercially. The term is 1960s cockney rhyming slang for curry, and Dishoom uses it to describe its Chicken Ruby dish. Mr Aziz responded that the name was in use for a food premises in Islington that was closed for refurbishment.
Answered by Jonathan Paton, Founder & CEOWhat does ‘use it or lose it’ mean for UK trademarks?
A registered trademark that is not genuinely used can be challenged and removed from the register. After five years on the register, an unused mark can be revoked, and the burden of proving use falls on the owner. A challenge does not have to be all or nothing, as it can strip out the categories the owner never traded in, so keeping clear evidence of use is worth the effort.
Answered by Jonathan Paton, Founder & CEOWhat can a business do with a trademark it no longer uses?
Rather than let it go to waste, an owner can consider licensing the trademark to others, including competitors. An unused registration is at risk of revocation for non-use, while a licence can put the mark to work and generate income. Trademarks are property, so they can also be sold or assigned, and it is worth taking advice on which option suits the business.
Answered by Jonathan Paton, Founder & CEO
