62 having regard to the nature and charac¬ ter of the subject-matter to which it is to be applied," My conclusion is that Design No 83/0647 was not novel or original, and that MULLINS J was correct in order¬ ing the cancellation of the registration. FORM OF ORDER It was submitted on behalf of Schultz that paras 1 and 2 of the order made by the Court a quo were too wide. I agree that the order should be amended to make it clear that the interdict relates solely to the Butt- Cat hull (which was the only hull in issue in the appli¬ cation), and that the order for delivery up in para 2 should relate solely to the period after 17 October 1983. In