Trade mark decision

BL Number
Decision date
2 July 2003
Hearing Officer
Mr D Landau
06, 24, 25
Patricia Hard O’Connell & Michael O’Connell
Tottenham Hotspur Plc
Sections 5(1) & 5(2)(a)


Section 5(1): - Opposition succeeded.

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

Points Of Interest

  • None


The opponents opposition was based on their ownership of a registration of the mark TOTTENHAM in Classes 6, 24 and 25 in respect of identical and very similar goods to those of the applicant.

The applicants had proceeded with their mark to advertisement on the basis of “honest concurrent use” but the provisions of Section 5(1) are mandatory once the owners of the relevant registration enter opposition. Thus the opponents succeeded in their opposition on this ground.

In certain circumstances “honest concurrent use” may assist applicants but in this case the Hearing Officer noted, with regard to Section 5(2)(a), that the respective marks were identical and the goods at issue were very similar. He, therefore, believed confusion was inevitable and that the opponents must also succeed on this ground.

Full decision O/192/03 PDF document19Kb