Trade mark decision

BL Number
Decision date
10 February 2003
Hearing Officer
Mr M Reynolds
09, 16
Wegener Falkplan BV
Easygroup IP Licensing Limited
Sections 5(2)(b); 5(3) & 5(4)(a)


Section 5(2)(b) - Opposition failed

Section 5(3) - Opposition failed

Section 5(4)(a) - Opposition failed

Points Of Interest

  • Comparison of the marks EASYJET v EASYTRAVEL


The opposition was based on a number of marks, EASYJET, EASYTRAIN, EASYBUS, registered in Classes 16, 39 and 42. The Hearing Officer dealt with the matter first under Section 5(2)(b). It was common ground that similar and identical goods were involved in the case of the opponents' Class 16 registrations.

Having considered the marks however the Hearing Officer was not persuaded that any association would be more than a fleeting and superficial one; it would not amount to a likelihood of confusion. The opposition under Section 5(2)(b) failed accordingly.

This and the fact that the opponents had not shown the necessary reputation, decided the matter under Section 5(3) also.

The evidence relating to goodwill and reputation if it established anything, related to airline services only. There appeared to be no intention to deceive and these considerations together with the low level of similarity in the marks, decided the matter under Section 5(4)(a) in favour of the applicants.

Full decision O/041/03 PDF document55Kb