Withdrawal of Osho’s ‚Will‘
On January 2nd, 2014, Osho International Foundation (OIF) submitted the withdrawal of the so-called ‚Last Will‘ of Osho to the European Court.
The withdrawal is nothing but a damage control and it proves that Osho’s ‚Last Will‘ is actually a forgery. Obviously, if the ‚Will‘ existed, OIF would have provided the original or notarized copy. Trying to withdraw the ‚Will‘ from the proceedings is simply a trick to avoid possible punishment, as if nothing has happened.
Here is the excerpt from the OIF’s submission:
„… OIF is taking this action in the light of wholly unfounded allegations raised outside this proceeding questioning authenticity of the document. While OIF does not in any way agree with the questions raised, OIF does not wish to present any document which would distract the attention of the OHIM (Office for Harmonization in the Internal Market) from the key evidence and issues of the case at hand. …“
Full text of this submission can be found here.
To address this issue, Osho Lotus Commune e.V. has replied with the additional submission to the European Court, where, i.e., we state the following:
„…The attempt of the CTM Owner (The Owner of the Contested Trademark — here, OIF) to withdrawal the Exhibit from the proceeding and to have it disregarded is not only inadmissible and a cheap trick. In the first place it shows that CTM Owner himself does not believe in the authenticity of the Last Will as otherwise the CTM Owner would have produced the original or a notarized copy.
The fact that the CTM Owner presented an alleged will that four experts have found involves an attempt at forgery is relevant to this case, in that the CTM Owner relies heavily on the testimony of Mr. Toelkes, whose credibility as a witness is thrown into doubt by his testimony about the Last Will document and his signature of it. …
We wonder whether the submission in an OHIM proceeding of a document which appears to be most likely a forgery may constitute a conduct that is no only relevant under the procedural rules of the OHIM but may even be relevant also under the applicable criminal law. We leave it to the Office to consider this in the appropriate way.“
Full text of this submission can be found here.
nbsp;
Other posts related to this topic:
