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 >> EINSTEIN (Trade Mark: Revocation) [2007] UKIntelP o06807 (28 February 2007)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2007/o06807.html
Cite as: [2007] UKIntelP o06807, [2007] UKIntelP o6807

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


EINSTEIN (Trade Mark: Revocation) [2007] UKIntelP o06807 (28 February 2007)

For the whole decision click here: o06807

Trade mark decision

BL Number
O/068/07
Decision date
28 February 2007
Hearing officer
Mr Geoffrey Hobbs QC
Mark
EINSTEIN
Classes
25
Registered Proprietor/Appellant
Continental Shelf 128 Limited
Applicants for Revocation/Respondent
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Appeal to the Appointed Person against the decision of

Result

Appeal successful; Hearing Officer’s decision set aside.

Points Of Interest

Summary

At first instance (see BL O/059/06) the Hearing Officer had ruled that the evidence of use supplied by the registered proprietor had not established that that use was ‘by or with the consent of the proprietor’. The application for revocation had succeeded accordingly. The registered proprietor appealed to the Appointed Person.

The Appointed Person found the Hearing Officer wrong in that he did not allow the parties to clarify these doubts by means of written submissions. By raising and ruling on these matters himself he had taken too much of the conduct of the case into his own hands.

The Appointed Person proceeded to a detailed analysis of the present state of the law in relation to the question of control of quality by the registered proprietor over any goods marketed by another party with his consent.

In the result the Appointed Person found that the Registrar had to be satisfied that the use had been with the proprietor’s consent but it was not necessary for him to be satisfied that that use had been effectively controlled.

The Hearing Officer’s decision was set aside and the Registrar was to proceed on the basis of the more limited specification which had been considered by the Hearing Officer.



BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2007/o06807.html