Trade mark decision

BL Number

O/037/98

Decision date

4 March 1998

Hearing officer

Mr M Reynolds

Mark

CLUB 240

Classes

25

Applicant

Vijay Kumar Hallan

Opponent

Club 24 Ltd

Opposition

Sections 5(2)(b), 5(3) & 5(4)(a)

Result

Section 5(2)(b) - Opposition failed.

Section 5(3) - Opposition failed.

Section 5(4)(a) - Opposition failed.

Points Of Interest

• 1. Promotional use of a mark. The opponents filed evidence showing use of their mark on the front of a sweatshirt but the mark on the label was different and the Hearing Officer concluded that the use shown was merely promotional and not used in a trade mark sense.

Summary

The opponents opposition was based on their ownership of two registrations for the mark CLUB 24 (one stylised and one with a logo) in class 36 in respect of financial and credit services. The mark CLUB 24 was used to provide retail credit to customers purchasing items of clothing from the NEXT range of stores. It had been in operation for a number of years and more recently had broadened it activities to offer credit facilities for purchases from stores outside the NEXT Group.

Under Section 5(2)(b) the Hearing Officer compared the applicant’s clothing goods with the opponents credit services and decided that while they came into contact with each other at certain points in the purchasing process, they were not similar and therefore opposition failed on this ground.

With regard to the ground under Section 5(3) the Hearing Officer was unable to establish from the evidence filed, what reputation the opponents mark had with the general public and there was no evidence whatsoever to indicate what use of the applicant’s mark would impact upon or be detrimental to the repute of the opponents mark. Opposition failed on this ground.

The ground under Section 5(4)(a) - Passing off - also failed on the basis that the marks at issue were somewhat different (the opponents mark as used was stylised); the opponents reputation was not fully established by the evidence filed and the likelihood of misrepresentation or damage had not been proved.

---

BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/1998/o03798.html