Trade mark decision

BL Number

O/165/99

Decision date

16 June 1999

Hearing officer

Mr D Morgan

Mark

MIRGOFF

Classes

33

Applicant

Daniel Martin Woods

Opponent

Heublein Inc

Opposition

Sections 5(2)(b); 5(3) & 56

Result

Section 5(2)(b) - opposition successful

Section 5(2)(b) - opposition successful

Section 5(3) - opposition dismissed

Section 5(3) - opposition dismissed

Section 56 - no formal finding

Section 56 - no formal finding

Points Of Interest

• Comparison of marks: SMIRNOFF v MIRGOFF gave rise to a likelihood of confusion taking account of the visual and aural similarities and imperfect recollection.

Summary

The opponents cited their mark SMIRNOFF as the basis for their opposition. The Hearing Officer, taking into account the "visual and aural similarities of the respective marks and imperfect recollection" was of "the clear view that there (existed) a likelihood of confusion". The opposition therefore succeeded under Section 5(2)(b). The Section 5(3) objection was dismissed because the goods were identical or similar. He made no finding under Section 56.

---

BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/1999/o16599.html