Trade mark decision

BL Number
Decision date
20 May 2002
Hearing Officer
Mr J MacGillivray
Cerveceria Nacional Dominicana, C. POR A.
BSA (Formerly known as Besnier S.A.)
Sections 3(6); 5(2)(b); 5(3) & 5(4)(a)


Section 3(6) - Opposition failed.

Section 5(2)(b) - Opposition failed.

Section 5(3) - Opposition failed.

Section 5(4)(a) - Opposition failed.

Points Of Interest

  • None


The opposition was based on the opponents’ registrations in Class 29 of their PRESIDENT marks. Under Section 5(2)(b) the Hearing Officer found that the goods were not similar. In case he should be found wrong in this, however, he went on to consider the respective marks. These were similar, he found, but as he had earlier found that the goods were not similar, the opposition under 5(2)(b) failed. In any event, he believed, a global appreciation of the overall differences would indicate that there was no likelihood of confusion.

Under Section 5(3), the Hearing Officer having reviewed the evidence stated that in his opinion any reputation the opponents had in relation to dairy products under the PRESIDENT mark would not be damaged by the applicants’ use of their mark on beer. He was doubtful that any association between the parties would be made, let alone damage caused. The onus to demonstrate this was on the opponents.

Under Section 5(4)(a), the Hearing Officer found that the opponent had not shown that a misrepresentation would occur in relation to the goods specified.

Finally, he found that the allegation of bad faith (Section 3(6)) had not been substantiated.

Full decision O/211/02 PDF document235Kb