Trade mark decision

BL Number
Decision date
19 August 2003
Hearing Officer
Mr J MacGillivray
Perdigao Agroindustrial S'A
Plukon Beheer B.V.
Section 5(2)(b)


Section 5(2)(b) - Opposition successful.

Points Of Interest

  • 1. None


The opponen'’s opposition was based on their ownership of registrations in Class 29 for the marks FRIKI and FRIKI F & device in respect of identical and similar goods. The opponent also filed evidence of use but this was insufficiently focused to show enhanced distinctiveness.

Under Section 5(2)(b) the Hearing Officer noted that identical goods were at issue and went on to compare the marks FRESKI & device and FRIKI. He considered that the opponen'’s word mark represented their best case. In comparing the marks visually the Hearing Officer noted that FRESKI was likely to be viewed as the dominant element in the applicant's marks and this word shared the same first two and last two letters with the opponent’s mark FRIKI. Overall he considered the two marks to be visually similar and to a lesser extent similar phonetically. Taking account of the nature of the goods and imperfect recollection, since both marks consist of invented words, the Hearing Officer concluded that there was a likelihood of confusion of the public. Opposition thus succeeded.

Full decision O/238/03 PDF document300Kb