Trade mark decision

BL Number
Decision date
22 August 2000
Hearing Officer
Mr G Salthouse
Michael Neame & Martin Clarke trading as MTEC Partnership
Carphone Warehouse Limited
Sections 3(3)(b), 3(4) & 3(6). Sections 5(2)(b), 5(3) & 5(4)(a)


Sections 3(4) & 3(6), 5(2)(a) & 5(3) - Withdrawn

Section 3(3)(b) - Opposition failed

Section 5(4)(a) - Opposition failed

Points Of Interest

  • None


At the hearing all the grounds of opposition were withdrawn with the exception of 3(3)(b) and 5(4)(a). As regards 3(3)(b) the Hearing Officer accepted that while the word MOBILE had specific connotations in relation to some of the goods listed in the applicants specification, it is also a well known word with a broader meaning and he therefore doubted that the mark was in any way deceptive in relation to the goods listed. Opposition failed on this ground.

The essential ground of opposition in these proceedings was under Section 5(4)(a) - Passing Off. While the Hearing Officer accepted that identical goods were at issue and that the opponents had a reputation in their mark CARPHONE WAREHOUSE, he took the view that the respective marks are not confusingly similar. In particular he rejected a claim by the opponents that MOBILE and CARPHONE are synonymous and went on to conclude that the opposition failed on this ground.

Full decision O/307/00 PDF document26Kb