Trade mark decision

BL Number
Decision date
20 June 2008
Hearing Officer
Mr M Foley
07, 10, 17, 35
Tom Parker Ltd
Parker Intangibles LLC
Section 5(2)(b). (Section 5(3) was also invoked but subsequently dropped).


Section 5(2)(b); opposition failed.

Points Of Interest

  • 1. Comparison of the marks PARKER v PARKAIR
  • 2. Concurrent use


The opposition was based on a number of ‘PARKER’ marks, registered in Classes 6, 7, 9, 11, 17 and 42. Some of the opponents’ marks were stylised but the Hearing Officer based his assessment on the view that they were essentially ‘PARKER’ marks.

There was identicality/similarity in most of the goods and services but having reviewed all the circumstances of the trade and the nature of the goods and services the Hearing Officer, on a global assessment found no likelihood of confusion.

There was a history of concurrent use but the Hearing Officer emphasised that he had reached his decision without taking account of what impact this might have had. He did however note that “whilst it is possible that there is undiscovered confusion, it is telling that the opponents have been content to allow the two mark to be used side by side without any apparent concern in this respect.”

The opposition failed.

Full decision O/171/08 PDF document97Kb