Trade mark decision

BL Number
O/090/02
Decision date
25 February 2002
Hearing Officer
Mr M Foley
Mark
AFTER SEX MINTS
Classes
30
Applicant
Sweetmasters Limited
Opponent
Societe Des Produits Nestle SA
Opposition
Section 5(2)(b)

Result

Section 5(2)(b) - Opposition failed

Points Of Interest

  • None

Summary

The opponents opposition was based on their ownership of registrations for the mark AFTER EIGHT in respect of the same goods as those of the applicant. They also filed details of extensive use and promotion of the mark AFTER EIGHT and the Hearing Officer accepted that they had a significant reputation in that mark.

Under Section 5(2)(b) the Hearing Officer noted that identical goods were at issue and went on to compare the respective marks AFTER EIGHT and AFTER SEX MINTS. He also noted from the evidence filed by the opponents that their mark was sometime promoted and used in the style AFTER EIGHT MINTS. The Hearing Officer accepted that there was a degree of similarity both visually and aurally but noted that the words SEX and EIGHT were very different words and thus the marks as totalities were rather different conceptually. The Hearing Officer did not discount the fact that the applicants mark might being to mind the opponents mark but he did not believe that there was any likelihood of confusion between the respective marks. Opposition thus failed.

Full decision O/090/02 PDF document26Kb