Trade mark decision

BL Number
Decision date
11 February 2003
Hearing Officer
Dr W J Trott
09, 35, 42
Cegedim (Societe Anonyme)
Havas Medimedia SA
Sections 5(2)(b) & 5(4)(a)


Section 5(2)(b) - Opposition failed

Section 5(4)(a) - Opposition failed

Points Of Interest

  • 1. Late amendment of pleadings
  • 2. Comparison of the marks MEDIMEDIA & device v MEDIMED


The opponents were proprietors and users of the mark MEDIMEDIA and device of a human figure. As a preliminary point the Hearing Officer considered the opponents' request to amend the pleadings so as to refer to a CTM registration. An extensive consideration of the request resulted in the amendment as requested.

The Hearing Officer then turned to a consideration of the matter under Section 5(2)(b). He decided to proceed on the basis that same and similar goods were involved. Having considered the marks he found that they showed similarities but he did not regard these as persuasive. On a global appreciation he eventually decided that there was no likelihood of confusion.

The evidence did not persuade the Hearing Officer that a goodwill had been created; in view of his finding under Section 5(2)(b) he did not believe that any confusion would arise from use of the applicants' mark in the UK. The Section 5(4)(a) ground failed accordingly.

Full decision O/043/03 PDF document81Kb