Trade mark decision

BL Number
Decision date
1 November 2007
Hearing Officer
Mr R Colombo
Gerard Dugdill
Xcess Media Limited
1. Sections 3(6) & 5(4)(a) 2. Interlocutory hearing to consider request by opponent for an extension of time within which to file evidence in reply.


Request by opponent for extension of time. Extension allowed.

Points Of Interest

  • The applicant appealed to the Appointed Person. In his decision dated 23 June 2008 (BL O/201/08) the Appointed Person dismissed the appeal and upheld the Hearing Officer's decision.


Following the filing of opposition both parties requested, and were allowed, extensions of time before filing their evidence in chief. Subsequently the opponent was allowed a period of three months to 28 May 2007 to file its evidence in reply. At or about this date the opponent stated that it required a further three months to file its response because it had dispensed with its trade mark representatives and time was needed to obtain the relevant files and prepare the reply evidence. It pointed out that the applicant had filed lengthy and complex evidence.

The registry initially refused the request but on appeal allowed the extension of three months. The applicant objected to the grant and requested a hearing. The hearing took place on 12 September 2007 by which time the opponent had filed its evidence in reply.

After hearing the parties the Hearing Officer confirmed the Registrar’s view to grant the extension of time requested so that the evidence provided could be accepted into the proceedings. In his view the reasons for the request had been valid, the evidence had been filed and it was preferable that the current proceedings should proceed to a conclusion.

Full decision O/320/07 PDF document50Kb