BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £5, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions >> MER (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2000] UKIntelP o32400 (28 August 2000) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2000/o32400.html Cite as: [2000] UKIntelP o32400 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
For the whole decision click here: o32400
Result
Section 5(2) - Opposition failed
Section 5(3) - Opposition failed
Section 5(4) - Opposition failed
Points Of Interest
Summary
The opponents opposition was based on their registered mark MERYL and some use of that mark on fibres and yarns etc for use in making a range of articles of clothing, underwear, lingerie, fabric shoes etc. Insofar as the respective specifications of goods were at issue the Hearing Officer noted that identical goods were at issue and went on to compare the respective marks MER and MERYL in the context of Section 5(2)(b). The Hearing Officer concluded that the marks were visually and phonetically different and that there was no likelihood of confusion, even if imperfect recollection was taken into account. The Hearing Officer also considered that the limited use did not enhance the opponents position. Opposition failed.
As a result of the decision under Section 5(2) the Hearing Officer dealt only briefly with the grounds under Sections 5(3) and 5(4) and concluded that the opponent failed on those grounds also.
