In 1999, The Carat Club registered the word 'love' in block letters as a trademark for its diamonds, precious stones and jewellery.

Now, rival jeweller Love & Co has gone to court demanding that The Carat Club revoke the trademark. Its argument is that the word is not distinctive and has been commonly used in the jewellery trade.

The case was heard on Wednesday before Justice Chan Seng Onn, who will give his decision at a later date.

Love & Co opened stores in Singapore and Kuala Lumpur last November.

About a week before the launch of the KL store, its Malaysian company received a letter from the lawyers for The Carat Club.

The letter alleged that Love & Co had infringed its trademark and demanded that it stop using the name.

Love & Co's lawyers Drew & Napier then searched the Singapore trademark register and discovered that The Carat Club owned the registration for 'LOVE'.

The lawyers later sent a letter to The Carat Club demanding that it cancel the trademark. The Carat Club, through its lawyers Rodyk & Davidson, refused.

Love & Co then went to the High Court, seeking a declaration on the invalidity of the trademark.

On Wednesday, Love & Co's lawyer Dedar Singh Gill argued that The Carat Club could not monopolise an ordinary English word and bar others in the trade from using it for their business.

He argued that under the Trade Marks Act , the word 'love' could not be registered because it is not distinctive.

He submitted numerous newspaper articles and magazine advertisements to show that 'love' was closely associated with jewellery and gems, and that jewellers have been using the word to market their products and as part of the names of jewellery collections.

He further noted that jewellery was often given as an expression of love.

But Ms Yew Woon Chooi, for The Carat Club, argued that the word 'love' did not in any way describe jewellery. None of its dictionary definitions had anything to do with jewellery, she said.

She argued that even though some jewellers used the word in advertising campaigns, it was a far cry from saying that the word had become a generic term for jewellery.

Citing the case of Apple Computer, she asserted that common English words could be registered.

Mr Singh's retort: There was a relationship between jewellery and love, unlike apples and computers.