Trade mark decision

BL Number
Decision date
18 June 2002
Hearing Officer
Mr M Foley
06, 19
Richter-System GmbH & CO KG
Ecophon AS
Sections 5(2)(b); 5(3) & 5(4)(a)


Section 5(2)(b) - Opposition failed

Section 5(3) - Opposition failed

Section 5(4)(a) - Opposition failed

Points Of Interest

  • 1. Comparison of the marks EUROPHON v ECOPHON


The opposition was based on the opponents registrations and use of their mark ECOPHON, in Classes 6, 17 and 19. Dealing with the matter, first, under Section 5(2)(b), the Hearing Officer concentrated on the opposition in respect of Classes 6 and 19, since the opponents could be in no better position in respect of Class 17. Comparing the specifications and the marks, however, the Hearing Officer could not conclude that there was a likelihood of confusion and the objection under Section 5(2)(b) failed accordingly.

Under Section 5(3) the Hearing Officer considered that his findings in respect of the similarity of the marks, together with the fact that the opponents had not established in evidence their claim to a requisite degree of reputation, that ground failed also.

Under Section 5(4)(a), the Hearing Officer having noted the lack of evidence of reputation found the opponents could be in no better position with respect to the requisite goodwill. That ground failed as well.

Full decision O/245/02 PDF document25Kb