Trade mark decision

BL Number
O/142/98
Decision date
7 July 1998
Hearing Officer
Mr M Reynolds
Mark
POWERFUEL
Classes
32
Applicants
Sports Direct Limited
Opponents
Twin Laboratories Inc
Opposition
Sections 3(1)(b) & 5(2)(b)* *Numerous other grounds were raised but they could not hope to succeed in the absence of evidence. Counsel confined himself to the grounds stated above.

Result

Section 3(1)(b) - opposition failed

Section 5(2)(b) - opposition failed

Points Of Interest

  • None.

Summary

The Hearing Officer held that the mark was distinctive; the Section 3(1)(b) ground failed accordingly. Under Section 5(2)(b) the opponents relied on their marks CHROMIC FUEL, TWINLAB ULTRA FUEL and HYDRAFUEL, all registered in Class 5. It was held that similar goods were involved therefore the matter came down to a comparison of marks. The word FUEL, the only common element, was non distinctive and contributed little to the overall character of the respective marks. The connection between the remaining marks was ‘too remote’ for there to be any reasonable likelihood of confusion.

Full decision O/142/98 PDF document16Kb