Trade mark decision

BL Number
Decision date
14 January 2002
Appointed Person
Professor Ruth Annand
Convinca, SDAD, COOP
Miguel Torres SA
Sections 5(2)(b) & 5(4)(a)


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

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

Points Of Interest

  • 1. This was an appeal from the Hearing Officer’s decision dated 8 January 2001 (SRIS O/012/01).


The Appointed Person reviewed the evidence of use of the opponents marks TORRES and three towers device which was before the Hearing Officer and agreed with his view that the opponents had established a reputation in their TORRES mark and their three towers device. Under Section 5(2)(b) it was common ground that identical goods were at issue and that the opponents strongest case rested on their TORRES mark and also another registration TORRES MILMANDA. The Appointed Person reviewed the Hearing Officer’s comparison of these marks with the applicants mark and confirmed his finding that the respective marks were not confusingly similar. Opposition failed on this ground.

Under Section 5(4)(a) - Passing Off - the opponents referred to the fact that they also used countryside scenes with their mark TORRES and other TORRES marks. However, the Appointed Person noted that their evidence did not establish the necessary use to confirm an established goodwill in such elements, thus as the respective marks had been found not to be confusingly similar under Section 5(2)(b), a similar finding under this heading was fatal to the opponents case. Opposition also failed on this ground.

Full decision O/045/02 PDF document166Kb