Company Law Reform Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 73A:"Page 30, line 39, leave out subsection (1) and insert—" ““(1)   If an application under section 70 is upheld, the adjudicator shall make an order, either— (a)   requiring the respondent company to change its name to one that is not an offending name, and requiring all respondents— (i)   to take all such steps as are within their powers to make, or facilitate the making of that change, and (ii)   not to cause or permit any steps to be taken calculated to result in another company being registered with a name that is an offending name, or (b)   requiring the respondent company to undertake to the applicant and to the Secretary of State not to operate under the registered name in connection with such activities as may be specified in the order.”” The noble Lord said: The amendment would correct what we see as an anomaly in the scope of the order that the adjudicator can make under Clause 73(1). In the case of many company names and trademarks, the goodwill attached to them will apply only in certain fields of activity or endeavour. Except where a name is especially well known or famous, uses outside those specific fields might not be likely to mislead; therefore, the requirement to change a name just because it is similar is, in our view, too restrictive. It should be open to the adjudicator, in appropriate cases, to order that the respondent company may retain the disputed name provided that it gives an undertaking not to operate in fields of activity where the applicant’s name has goodwill attached to it. It is fairly obvious how that would work. I beg to move.