Trade mark decision

BL Number

O/111/02

Decision date

12 March 2002

Hearing Officer

Mr G Salthouse

Mark

PC CLEAR

Classes

32

Applicant

Silver Spring Mineral Water Company Limited

Opponent

Loblaw Companies Limited

Opposition

Sections 5(1); 5(2)(a) & 5(2)(b)* *Other grounds under Section 3 were withdrawn and a request to amend the pleadings to include Section 5(4) was refused at the hearing.

Result

Section 5(1): - Opposition failed.

Section 5(2)(a): - Opposition failed.

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

Points Of Interest

• 1. "If use of a trade mark in ordinary letters does not constitute use of a stylised trade mark, then conversely use of a stylised trade mark does not constitute use of a trade mark registered in ordinary letters."

Summary

The opposition was based on four registrations of a device mark which, the opponents claimed, consisted of the letters PC in stylised form. The opposition under Section 5(1) and (5(2)(a) failed automatically as the marks were not identical.

Under Section 5(2)(b) the Hearing Officer thought that it was “far from certain that consumers would identify the letters “PC” in the mark”. Neither did he accept that the public would automatically see the word (clear) as a descriptor and not as part of the mark. With all the factors considered he did not conclude that there existed a likelihood of confusion.

Full decision O/111/02 111Kb