Trade mark decision

BL Number

O/142/98

Decision date

7 July 1998

Hearing officer

Mr M Reynolds

Mark

POWERFUEL

Classes

32

Applicants

Sports Direct Limited

Opponents

Twin Laboratories Inc

Opposition

Sections 3(1)(b) & 5(2)(b)* *Numerous other grounds were raised but they could not hope to succeed in the absence of evidence. Counsel confined himself to the grounds stated above.

Result

Section 3(1)(b) - opposition failed

Section 5(2)(b) - opposition failed

Points Of Interest

• None.

Summary

The Hearing Officer held that the mark was distinctive; the Section 3(1)(b) ground failed accordingly. Under Section 5(2)(b) the opponents relied on their marks CHROMIC FUEL, TWINLAB ULTRA FUEL and HYDRAFUEL, all registered in Class 5. It was held that similar goods were involved therefore the matter came down to a comparison of marks. The word FUEL, the only common element, was non distinctive and contributed little to the overall character of the respective marks. The connection between the remaining marks was ‘too remote’ for there to be any reasonable likelihood of confusion.

---

BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/1998/o14298.html