Trade mark decision

BL Number

O/090/99

Decision date

19 March 1999

Hearing officer

Mr M Knight

Mark

AURORA

Classes

11

Applicant

Urbis Lighting Limited

Opponent

Aura Light AB

Opposition

Sections 3(1)(b)*; 3(3)(b)*; 3(4)*; 5(2)(b); 5(3) & 5(4)(a)

Result

1. Opposition dismissed; opponent did not exist at date of filing opposition.

1. Opposition dismissed; opponent did not exist at date of filing opposition.

2. Provisional finding under Section 5(2)(b); opposition would have succeeded.

2. Provisional finding under Section 5(2)(b); opposition would have succeeded.

3. Provisional finding under Section 5(4)(a); opposition would have failed.

3. Provisional finding under Section 5(4)(a); opposition would have failed.

Points Of Interest

• 1. Substitution of opponent
• 2. Admission of further evidence

Summary

*The Hearing Officer dismissed these at the outset, since the attack using them appeared to be ‘relative’ in nature. The opposition was based on the opponent’s mark AURA. The Hearing Officer dismissed the opposition in its entirety since the opponent had not existed at the time of the filing of the opposition, and did not exist at the dates of the hearing. He went on, however, to deal with the remaining substantive issues under Section 5, after first refusing a request by the applicants to admit further evidence. Under Section 5(2)(b) the Hearing Officer found a likelihood of confusion arising from the similarity of the marks. Under Section 5(4)(a) however, he found that no case had been made out under passing-off.

---

BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/1999/o09099.html