Trade mark decision

BL Number
Decision date
10 May 2004
Appointed Person
Mr David Kitchin QC
Hyperama Plc
Java Bar Espresso
Sections 5(2)(b) & 5(4)(a)


Section 5(2)(b) - Appeal dismissed.

Section 5(4)(a) - Appeal dismissed.

Points Of Interest

  • 1. See also Hearing Officer’s decisions dated 26 June 2003 (BL O/180/03 and BL O/181/03).


The opponents appealed the Hearing Officer decisions of 26 June 2003 (BL O/180/03 and BL O/181/03). During the appeal period the opponents were declared bankrupt and the Appointed Person allowed a period of time for clarification but eventually decided to decide the appeal as nothing was forthcoming from the opponents’ representatives or successors (if any).

In their appeal the opponents had contended that the Hearing Officer had given insufficient weight to their use and reputation acquired, in assessing likely confusion with the marks in suit; that he had given insufficient weight to the similarity of EXPRESS and ESPRESSO in the respective marks and that his finding that JAVA was descriptive of a type and source of coffee was inconsistent with a finding that the word JAVA was non-distinctive.

The Appointed Person rejected all the opponents’ submissions. He reviewed the Hearing Officer’s decision and concluded that the Hearing Officer had identified the correct principles and carefully considered the evidence. He had made findings of fact as to the degree of distinctiveness of the earlier trade marks and applied the relevant principles properly in carrying out a global assessment of the likelihood of confusion. Appeal dismissed.

Full decision O/126/04 PDF document34Kb