National Trust for Scotland strikes conciliatory tone in trademark dispute

Lawyers for the charity, which owns the majority of the glen, asked Hilltrek Outdoor Clothing to stop selling its £365 Glencoe waterproof jacket, saying the charity was the “registered proprietor of the UK trademark registration for GLENCOE”.

David Shand, owner of the Aboyne-based company, said the jacket had been in production for between 25 and 30 years.

He said: “I was really angry, I just couldn’t believe it. I was stunned by it. They obviously think that Aboyne and Deeside is too far away to have a geographical connection, but I’ve been hill-walking in Glencoe since my late teens.

“We don’t produce huge numbers and our product is a premium product…Personally I hate bullies, so they’ve picked the wrong person. I’m determined to fight it.”

NTS’s lawyers said only goods and services with geographical links to Glencoe may use the name, in order to protect the trade interests of the local community.

Hilltrek had been told to “immediately stop selling any goods which include the name GLENCOE from your website” by August 11 or face potential legal action.

An NTS spokesman said: “The National Trust for Scotland does hold the trademark for the name Glencoe and as such there are restrictions on how the name can be used by other parties.

“The purpose of this was to protect them from being acquired by commercial organisations with no links to these areas, as well as providing an opportunity for the Trust to raise awareness of these places and its role in caring for them.”

But in a subsequent statement, NTS said it would be willing to discuss the issue with the company.

A spokesman said: “In retrospect, although the letter sent to Hilltreck was a standard one, it may have been in the circumstances of this particular company too harsh in tone. Our only desire is to protect the properties in our care and stop them being exploited.

“Our letter to Hilltreck was intended to open up negotiation to establish if the company had legal prior trading rights and clearly the wording and tone did not convey this. We would be happy to enter into a dialogue with them with the aim of finding a mutually-agreeable solution.”