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!



BAILII [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 >> Isosceles CONSULTING INC. Vitality Driver (Trade Mark: Revocation) [2004] UKIntelP o33204 (8 November 2004)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2004/o33204.html
Cite as: [2004] UKIntelP o33204

[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]


Isosceles CONSULTING INC. Vitality Driver (Trade Mark: Revocation) [2004] UKIntelP o33204 (8 November 2004)

For the whole decision click here: o33204

Trade mark decision

BL Number
O/332/04
Decision date
8 November 2004
Hearing officer
Mr J MacGillivray
Mark
Isosceles CONSULTING INC. Vitality Driver
Classes
35
Applicant for Revocation
Field Fisher Waterhouse
Registered Proprietor
Marketing Triangle Incorporated
Revocation
Section 46(1)(a) & 1(b)

Result

Section 46(1)(a) & 1(b) - Application for revocation successful

Points Of Interest

Summary

The applicant for non-use submitted that the registered mark had not been used in the five years following registration or for an uninterrupted period of five years prior to the application. The relevant periods thus covered the period 1996 to 2003 when the application for revocation was made.

The registered proprietor filed use of what it said was its mark and the Hearing Officer accepted that there had in fact been use of marks by the registered proprietor during the relevant period. However, close inspection showed that the proprietor had used marks such as ISOSCELES CONSULTLING INC without the VITALITY DRIVER and device element and BRAND VITALITY DRIVER and device without the words ISOSCELES CONSULTING INC. There was in fact no use of the mark as registered and the Hearing Officer decided that separate use of the various elements was use of different marks as compared to that registered. The application for revocation was thus successful.



BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2004/o33204.html