Trade mark decision

BL Number
Decision date
10 January 2002
Hearing Officer
Mr S P Rowan
25, 35, 41, 42
Associated Newspapers
IPC Media Limited
Sections 5(2)(b), 5(3) & 5(4)(a)


Section 5(2)(b) - Opposition partially successful

Section 5(3) - Opposition failed

Section 5(4)(a) - Not decided

Points Of Interest

  • 1. None


The applicants had used their mark from about 1908 but, with one or two exceptions, such use had always been in the form DAILY MAIL IDEAL HOME EXHIBITION. The opponents had published a magazine with the title IDEAL HOME from 1920 onwards. They had also published associated publications with titles incorporating the words IDEAL HOME. Their mark was registered in Class 16.

Under Section 5(2)(b) the Hearing Officer considered the respective marks to be visually, aurally and conceptual similar. He also considered, after applying the usual tests, that the opponents goods were identical or similar to the applicants goods in Class 16 and similar to some of the applicants services in Classes 35, 41 and 42. The opponents were thus successful to a limited extent on this ground.

The opponents also pressed their claim under Section 5(3) of the Act but the Hearing Officer noted that they were quite happy for the applicants mark to proceed in respect of the organisation and arrangement of exhibitions. This meant they had accepted the existence of another similar mark in the marketplace in respect of dissimilar services. Thus their claim to damage and dilution of their mark in respect of other dissimilar services was not a ground which could be sustained under Section 5(3). The Hearing Officer also decided that the opponents could not be in any better position under Section 5(4) as compared to the ground under Section 5(2)(b) and did not consider it further.

Full decision O/006/02 PDF document55Kb