Trade mark decision

BL Number
O/239/01
Decision date
29 May 2001
Hearing Officer
Mr J MacGillivray
Mark
DEVICE ONLY MARK
Classes
09, 25
Applicant
Halfords Limited
Opponent
N V Kipling
Opposition
Section 3(1)(c); 5(2)(b); 5(3) & 5(4)(a)

Result

Section 3(1)(c): - Opposition failed.

Section 5(2)(b): - Opposition failed.

Section 5(3): - Opposition failed.

Section 5(4)(a): - Opposition failed.

Points Of Interest

  • Comparison of the ‘monkey’ device marks.

Summary

The opposition was based on the opponents’ marks consisting of devices of monkeys and the word KIPLING (one being of the device of a monkey, solus). These had an exclusion in respect of goods made of monkey skins or goods relating to monkeys. The attack under Section 3(1)(c) arose from a claim that the applicants’ specification should be similarly qualified. The Hearing Officer, however, dismissed this, remarking that mere evidence of existing entries on the register did not assist. Under Section 5(2)(b) the Hearing Officer, after detailed consideration of the matter concluded that the possibility of confusion was so remote that it could not be regarded as a likelihood. The case under Section 5(3) was no stronger, he found. Under Section 5(4)(a), the Hearing Officer found that the opponents did not have a reputation in the UK, and accordingly misrepresentation would not occur.

Full decision O/239/01 PDF document58Kb