Trade mark decision

BL Number
Decision date
26 April 2001
Hearing Officer
Mr M Reynolds
12, 25, 28
American Golf Discount Centre Limited
American Golf Corporation
Sections 3(3)(b); 3(6); 5(2)(b); 5(3); 5(4)


Section 3(3)(b) - Opposition failed

Section 3(6) - Opposition failed

Section 5(2)(b) - Opposition successful

Section 5(3) - Opposition successful

Section 5(4) - Opposition successful

Points Of Interest

  • 1. Amendment of pleadings
  • 2. Honest concurrent use
  • 3. Geographical indications


[This was one of three closely related oppositions involving the same parties and heard on the same date.] In this case the opposition was based on the opponents’ golf ball device mark (which also included the words AMERICAN GOLF CORPORATION). At the hearing an application was made to allow an amendment of the statement of grounds pertaining to the attack under Section 3(6). The Hearing Officer did not allow the amendment and gave his reasons. This effectively disposed of the Section 3(6) ground. The Section 5(3) and 5(4) grounds would have required evidence of use in the UK; this was lacking and these grounds were therefore dismissed. Under Section 5(2)(b), the Hearing Officer found that there was a likelihood of confusion and the opposition succeeded accordingly. Under Section 3(3)(b) the Hearing Officer found no basis for an objection to the mark.

Full decision O/195/01 PDF document44Kb