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 £1, 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 >> PHILOS (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2003] UKIntelP o38903 (15 December 2003) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2003/o38903.html Cite as: [2003] UKIntelP o38903 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
For the whole decision click here: o38903
Result
Section 1(1) - Opposition failed.
Section 3(6) - Opposition failed.
Section 5(2)(b) - Opposition failed.
Section 5(3) - Opposition failed.
Points Of Interest
Summary
The opposition was based on registrations and use of the mark PHILIPS. The Hearing Officer could see no valid objections under Section 1(1); neither was there a case under Section 3(6).
In his consideration of the objection under Section 5(2)(b) the Hearing Officer found the goods to be identical or closely similar. The mark applied for had a ‘reasonably high degree of distinctive character’; the opponents’ mark enjoyed an enhanced reputation in relation to communications and telecommunications goods.
On a comparison of the marks the Hearing Officer found ‘only a small degree of similarity’ and this was ‘outweighed by the different significations of the words’. There was no likelihood of confusion and the opposition under Section 5(2)(b) failed accordingly.
The Section 5(3) ground had been pleaded in the alternative in case the goods were found to be dissimilar; they were not. The ground would have failed in any event in the light of the finding on the respective marks.
