Trade mark decision

BL Number: O/154/01
Decision date: 6 March 2001
Appointed Person: Mr S Thorley QC
Mark: SARANTOS CHARDONNAY
Classes: 33
Applicant: Kingston Estate Wines Pty Ltd
Opponent: Champagne Moet & Chandon
Opposition: Section 5(2)(b)

Result

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

Points Of Interest

1. This was an appeal from Mr Reynold’s decision dated 24 August 2000. See BL O/320/00

Summary

As before the Hearing Officer it was common ground that identical goods were at issue so the only matter to be decided was whether or not the respective marks SARANTOS CHARDONNAY and device of a fish and SARAN were confusingly similar. A further declaration was filed by the opponents, which the Appointed Person allowed, relating to the distinctiveness of the opponents mark SARAN and the possibility of imperfect recollection.

The Appointed Person accepted that the respective word marks SARANTOS and SARON were similar and that the possibility of confusion through imperfect recollection could not be ruled out. However, taking the matter as a whole and approaching it globally, he concluded that the likelihood of confusion was not sufficient to merit allowing the appeal. The Hearing Officer’s decision was, therefore, upheld.

Full decision O/154/01 15Kb