Seychelles Airlines name valid |24 September 2015

The original registration of the business name Seychelles Airlines is valid and the certificate of registration is valid and remains valid to date, judge Gustave Dodin said in his ruling yesterday.

Justice Dodin has also ordered the Registrar of Companies to restore the business name Seychelles Airlines BRN B8412697-5 to the Register of Business Names forthwith.

The appellant company, Intershore Aviation Limited, had filed an application for registration of the business name ‘Seychelles Airlines’ on August 21, 2013.

On August, 22, 2013, the Registrar of Companies, who is also the Registrar of Business Names and Registrar-General, issued the Certificate of Registration number B8412697-5 together with a letter acknowledging the registration and a stamped copy of the application.

Intershore Aviation Limited subsequently proceeded to set up its business which is an airline operating business trading as Seychelles Airlines. By letter dated September 4, 2013, the Seychelles Civil Aviation Authority (SCAA) confirmed the designators for Seychelles Airlines being SCH for the three letter designator and Ocean Bird as the telephony designator.

By letter containing two dates of November 26, 2013 and November 27, 2013, the chief executive of SCAA Gilbert Faure wrote to the Registrar-General complaining about the registered name Seychelles Airlines.

The argument of the respondent was that the business Seychelles Airlines would be in direct competition with Air Seychelles hence unless it drops the word Seychelles from its name, it would have the effect of misleading and confusing the public, clients, stakeholders and regulators.

But Judge Dodin explained that neither Air Seychelles Limited, nor the government of Seychelles have raised any objection to the name Seychelles Airlines since its registration on August 22, 2013 to date.

“This can only lead me to conclude that those persons leading Air Seychelles Limited and the government of Seychelles are in tune with the basic competition and free trade norms,” said Judge Dodin.

He added that the Registration of Business Names Act makes no provision that the Registrar can request a change of name or cancel a registered name on the ground that there will be competition against an operating business.

In his judgment yesterday, Judge Dodin also said on the present appeal against the determination of the Registrar dated May 14, 2015 he finds:

a. that the reason advanced by the Registrar that the word Seychelles imports or suggests that the business enjoys the patronage of the government has not been established and is not sustainable or reasonable;

1. that the reasons advanced by the Registrar that the name Seychelles Airlines is likely to mislead the public by virtue of the word Seychelles being present and which might convey the impression that it is a subsidiary of Air Seychelles have not been established and are not reasonable or sustainable:
2. that the reasons advanced by the Registrar that in the Registrar’s opinion, the name would confuse clients, the public and airline stakeholders and regulators with the impression that Air Seychelles and Seychelles Airlines are not independent, have not been established and are not reasonable or sustainable:
3. that the Registrar failed to apply the Registrar’s mind judiciously or at all to factors that were necessary to consider in exercising the discretion given under section 17(1)(d) of the Registration of Business Names Act and therefore reached a conclusion that was so unreasonable and that no person in the position of the Registrar would have otherwise reached had these factors been properly considered; and
4. that the Registrar acted on the basis that the Registrar was only ordered to give reasons for the decision to cancel the registration and failed to reconsider the whole determination afresh by considering all the factors judiciously and coming to a reasonable, logical and judicious conclusion consistent with the provisions of section 17 of the Registration of Business Names Act.

The matter relating to the trading name of the new airline was first brought before the Court in December 2013, and the dispute had stalled the company's attempts to obtain an Air Operator's Certificate (AOC) from local aviation authorities.

Intershore Aviation was contesting demands made by the Seychelles Registrar that the airline’s trading name should be changed to exclude the word ‘Seychelles.’ The company argued that they had already been legally approved and registered by the registrar under the name ‘Seychelles Airlines’ since August 2013.

Section 17 of the Registration of Business Names Act of 1972 makes provision for the registrar to refuse to register any firm, individual or corporation carrying on business under a business name based on a number of reasons.