Trade mark decision

BL Number: O/110/99
Decision date: 12 April 1999
Hearing Officer: Mr D Landau
Mark: FMC
Classes: 35, 42
Applicant: Financial Management Consultants Limited
Opponent: Barclays Bank Plc
Opposition: Sections 3(6); 5(2)(b); 5(3) & 5(4)*

Result

Section 3(6) - Opposition failed

Section 5(2)(b) - Opposition failed

Section 5(3) - Opposition failed

Section 5(4) - Opposition failed

Points Of Interest

Comparison of the marks, services etc under Section 5(2)(b)

Summary

[*Other grounds, under Section 3 were cited, but the Hearing Officer found that these were either not pursued, or misconceived and dismissed them at the outset]. The opposition was based on the opponents’ use and registration of their eagle device. Under Section 3(6) the Hearing Officer found nothing in the evidence to indicate that the applicants had acted in bad faith and he dismissed this objection.

Under Section 5(2)(b) he found no likelihood of confusion. The opponents were not nationals of a Convention Country and accordingly could not benefit from the provisions of Section 56(1). They had not demonstrated a reputation in their eagle device; the Section 5(3) ground was therefore dismissed also. Under Section 5(4)(a) he found no deception, and under Section 5(4)(b) he found that the opponents had produced no evidence of a copyright in the 'eagle device'.

Full decision O/110/99 102Kb