ORDER under the Companies Act 2006

In the matter of application No. 1675 by Dr Ing. h.c. F. Porsche Aktiegesellshaft

For a change of company name of registration

No. 11068185

DECISION

The company name PORSCHE LTD has been registered since 16 November 2017 under number 11068185.

By an application filed on 30 January 2018, Dr Ing. h.c. F. Porsche Aktiegesellshaft applied for a change of name of this registration under the provisions of section 69(1) of the Companies Act 2006 (the Act).

A copy of this application was sent to the primary respondent’s registered office on 8 February 2018, in accordance with rule 3(2) of the Company Names Adjudicator Rules 2008.  The copy of the application was sent by Royal Mail special delivery.  It was returned “addressee unknown”.

A copy of the application was then sent by ordinary post.  On the same date, the Tribunal wrote to Cynthia Chimezie to inform her that the applicant had requested that she be joined to the proceedings.   The letter was returned as ‘addressee unknown’ and so it was re-sent via ordinary post. No comments were received from Ms Chimezie in relation to this request.

On 29 March 2018, Cynthia Chimezie was joined as a co-respondent.  On the same date, the parties were advised that no defence had been received to the application and so the adjudicator may treat the application as not being opposed.  The parties were granted a period of 14 days to request a hearing in relation to this matter, if they so wished.   No request for a hearing was made.   The letters to the primary respondent and to Ms Chimezie were returned to sender.

The primary respondent did not file a defence within the one month period specified by the adjudicator under rule 3(3).  Rule 3(4) states

“The primary respondent, before the end of that period, shall file a counter-statement on the appropriate form, otherwise the adjudicator may treat it as not opposing the application and may make an order under section 73(1).”

Under the provisions of this rule, the adjudicator may exercise discretion so as to treat the respondent as opposing the application.  In this case I can see no reason to exercise such discretion and, therefore, decline to do so.

As the primary respondent has not responded to the allegations made, it is treated as not opposing the application.  Therefore, in accordance with section 73(1) of the Act I make the following order:

(a) PORSCHE LTD shall change its name within one month of the date of this order to one that is not an offending namei;

(b) PORSCHE LTD and Cynthia Chimezie shall:

(i)	take such  steps  as  are  within  their  power  to  make,  or facilitate the making, of that change;

(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.

In accordance with s.73(3) of the Act, this order may be enforced in the same way as an order of the High Court or, in Scotland, the Court of Session.

In any event, if no such change is made within one month of the date of this order, I will determine a new company name as per section 73(4) of the Act and will give notice of that change under section 73(5) of the Act.

All respondents, including individual co-respondents, have a legal duty under Section 73(1)(b)(ii) of the Companies Act 2006 not to cause or permit any steps to be taken calculated to result in another company being registered with an offending name; this includes the current company.  Non-compliance may result in an action being brought for contempt of court and may result in a custodial sentence.

Dr Ing. h.c. F. Porsche Aktiegesellshaft, having been successful, would normally be entitled to a contribution towards its costs.  However, the applicant has confirmed that it did not contact the respondent prior to making the application. In accordance with section 10.4.1 of the Practice Direction, as no request for costs was made in the application, no award of costs is made.

Any notice of appeal against this decision to order a change of name must be given within one month of the date of this order.  Appeal is to the High Court in England, Wales and Northern Ireland and to the Court of Session in Scotland.

The company adjudicator must be advised if an appeal is lodged, so that implementation of the order is suspended.

Dated this 24th day of May 2018

Mark King
Company Names Adjudicator

iAn “offending name” means a name that, by reason of its similarity to the name associated with the applicant in which he claims goodwill, would be likely to be the subject of a direction under section 67 (power of Secretary of State to direct change of name), or to give rise to a further application under section 69.