Trade mark decision

BL Number
Decision date
3 March 2004
Hearing Officer
Mrs A Corbett
29, 30
Moy Park Ltd
Wiesenhof Geflügel-Kontor GmbH
Section 5(2)(b)


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

Points Of Interest

  • 1. None


The opponent’s opposition was essentially based on a prior Community Trade Mark application for the mark "Chicken-popcorn" for the same and similar goods as those of the applicant. The opponent had no use of this mark in the UK.

The applicant claimed the respective marks were not confusingly similar. They also pointed to the existence of two other marks on the UK register POPCORN CHICKEN and PIC-'N'-POPPIN CHICKEN which they indicated would be barriers to the registration of the opponent's mark.

Under Section 5(2)(b) the Hearing Officer noted that in this case he had only to compare the respective marks CHICKEN POPS and "chicken-popcorn" and the state of the Register did not affect that comparison. As the respective goods consist of or contain chicken the presence of the word 'chicken' in the respective marks did not add much to their overall distinctiveness. In comparing the words POPS and 'popcorn' the Hearing Officer concluded that they were different phonetically, visually and conceptually. Overall, therefore, he considered that the respective marks were not confusingly similar. Opposition thus failed.

Full decision O/058/04 PDF document37Kb