Trade mark decision

BL Number
Decision date
24 June 2008
Appointed Person
Ms Anna Carboni
SK.4 & device
03, 08
Simon Grogan
The Procter & Gamble Company
Appeal to the Appointed Person against the decision of the Registrar’s Hearing Officer in opposition proceedings


Appeal dismissed

Points Of Interest

  • 1. Comparison of goods in different classes
  • 2. Admission of further evidence on appeal
  • 3. See also BL O/333/07


At first instance (see BL O/333/07) the Hearing Officer had found for the opponents in respect of both the Class 3 goods and the Class 8 goods. The applicant appealed against the finding in respect of Class 8, in view of the great differences between toiletries in Class 3 and machinery in Class 8.

Having reviewed the matter, however, the Appointed Person concluded that the Hearing Officer had made no error of principle and had been entitled to each the conclusion that he did in respect of the Class 8 goods.

The appeal was dismissed.

The Appointed Person had also refused to admit further evidence submitted by the appellant.

Full decision O/176/08 PDF document75Kb