Trade mark decision

BL Number
Decision date
11 July 2002
Hearing Officer
Mr M Reynolds
16, 35, 42
Compassmark Limited
Kimpass International Neuenschwander SA
Section 5(2)(b)


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

Points Of Interest

  • 1. None


The opponents opposition was based on their ownership of registrations for the mark KOMPASS in Classes 9, 16 and 35. They also filed details of use of their mark which showed substantial user over a number of years. However, the Hearing Officer considered the evidence of use filed to be insufficiently detailed for him to assume that KOMPASS enjoyed an enhanced degree of distinctive character.

Under Section 5(2)(b) the Hearing Officer considered the opponents mark to be distinctive in relation to the goods and services at issue and that the word COMPASSMARK was a significant feature in the applicants mark. The Hearing Officer considered the respective marks to be similar aurally and conceptually and that overall they were in fact confusingly similar.

The Hearing officer compared the respective goods and services in detail and considered that in some instances some goods and services were identical and similar. In respect of such goods and services he found the opponents to be successful in their opposition.

However, where the goods and services were not similar, opposition failed and if the applicants agreed to amend their application it would be allowed to proceed for a restricted range of goods and services.

Full decision O/272/02 PDF document58Kb