Update Report：Supreme Court upholds injunction against improper use of “Ark Angel” Name and Trademark by Mr. Hayashi

Update Report：Supreme Court upholds injunction against improper use of “Ark Angel” Name and Trademark by Mr. Hayashi

On 7 September, 2010 the third petty bench of the Supreme Court of Japan unanimously denied Mr. Hayashi’s final appeal and petition to overturn the injunction opposed on him for his improper use of the “ARK Angels” name and trademark. The name “Ark Angels” was created by Ms. Oliver. a representative of ARK and was intended for use for an upcoming foster home programme. Despite various request by ARK to Mr. Hayashi to stop the use of the name “ARK Angel” without permission, Mr. Hayashi continued to improperly use the “ARK Angel” name, and further utilized said name to perpetrate donation fraud against Hiroshima Dog Park. His actions caused ARK a tremendous amount damages and suffering. This decision was the third decision in favour of an injunction to prohibit the use of name and trademark of Ark Angels by Mr. Hayashi; along with the judgment of first instance and the judgment of second instance by Osaka High Court. It has been over 3 years since Mr. Hayashi’s actions were first obsereved by ARK, and it has been about 3 years since the case was first brought before the court. We are very grateful for the fair judgment issued by the court.

18 September 2010
ARK Office

(Below text is taken from the written statement which was sent from the Supreme Court to the attorney’s office)

2010（オ）Article１６７５
2010（受）Article１３１４

All judges in agreement, following has been decided:

Chapter １　The Text　
　１　Final appeal is denied.
　２　Petition for acceptance of final appeal is denied.
　３　Fee occurred for petition of objection must be paid by appellant and petitioner.

Chapter ２　Reasons
　１　Final Appeal　
Code of Civil Procedure Article 312 (1) and (2) allow filing of final appeal with the Supreme Court in a civil case. Reason for final appeal in this case was unconstitutionality, however substantially it was either misunderstanding of facts or simply claiming a violation of the law and it was not applicable to above articles mentioned.
２　Petition for Acceptance of Final Appeal
　Based on the reason for petition, this case shall not be accepted by Article 318 (1).

7 September, 2010
The Supreme Court of Japan, Third Petty Bench