Fishhook in name of Cook
Hotel: Stoush over branding
THE new operator of Dunedin’s landmark Captain Cook Hotel says a liquidator’s attempts to force him to pay to use the hotel’s name are ‘‘unfair, unusual and intimidating’’.
The demands come at the same time as multinational company PwC threatens to have his temporary liquor licence cancelled.
Mike McLeod has been told by PwC not to use the name Captain Cook Hotel on a Facebook page.
The company asked him to ‘‘purchase the rights to this name’’ if he wanted to use it.
PwC also asked Mr McLeod to make a financial offer for the liquor licence of his predecessor or it would cancel it, also cancelling the temporary liquor licence he organised with the Dunedin City Council.
The idea the company has rights to the name of the hotel founded in 1860 has been scotched by Assoc Prof Barry Allan, of the University of Otago Faculty of Law.
He said PwC did not appear to own it.
The company did not respond to specific questions from the Otago Daily Times, instead saying it was trying to ‘‘maximise the return to creditors’’.
Mr McLeod took over the North Dunedin pub following the liquidation of Captain Cook Hotel Ltd, which ceased trading last October.
He opened the upstairs bar in February as a live music venue for local and overseas bands, and the downstairs ‘‘gastropub’’ last week.
PwC had been in contact asking him to ‘‘give them money to use the name the Captain Cook Hotel’’.
An email from PwC notes Mr McLeod was running a Facebook page under the name The Captain Cook Hotel.
‘‘Please note this name is currently that of the company and as such, you must obtain permission from the liquidators to use this name.’’
The company asked him to make an offer to buy it, and if he did not, amend the name of his business, and on social media.
Mr McLeod said the hotel had been called the Captain Cook since 1860, and he had never used the name as his company name.
Asked to clarify the legal aspect of the request, Prof Allan said company law did not give ownership of a name.
If someone used the name of an established business, the established business could take action.
‘‘But here the predecessor is gone, so there’s no real trading on the predecessor’s name, which, because they went into liquidation, isn’t worth anything anyway,’’ Prof Allan said.
If the name Captain Cook Hotel was a trademark, that would be a form of ownership, but PwC was not asserting a trademark.
‘‘I can’t see where a claim of ownership is coming from.’’
Another email from PwC said the temporary liquor licence Mr McLeod had was subject to the licence owned by the previous operator, and it planned to surrender the licence.
‘‘Please note that on surrender of this licence, any other licence which relies on it will be void.’’
The liquidator asked for ‘‘a written offer’’ for use of the licence.
If he did not provide one the company ‘‘will take steps to disclaim it’’.
Council licensing inspector Tony Mole said as the licence holder was in liquidation, the licence could not be used by the company.
But Mr McLeod’s threemonth licence ‘‘piggy backs on the existing licence’’.
If the licensee surrendered the licence, alcohol could not be sold.
Mr McLeod said there was no advantage to PwC, unless he paid it money to prevent it doing so.
That was ‘‘reasonably close to legal blackmail’’.
The attitude of PwC had made an already difficult time more difficult.
‘‘It’s very stressful opening a business in the first instance. There’s massive hours and financial investment and lots of work goes into it.
‘‘It’s just added a lot of stress and anxiety.’’
The threat to his liquor licence was a threat to his investment and livelihood.
PwC partner Malcolm Hollis said as was normal with any liquidation, the company had corresponded with Mr McLeod ‘‘with a view to entering commercial negotiations for the purchase of the assets of the company in order to maximise the return to creditors’’.
‘‘These discussions are ongoing. ‘‘We are confident that a suitable outcome for all parties can be reached with continued meaningful negotiations.’’