Trade mark decision

BL Number

O/345/99

Decision date

8 October 1999

Hearing Officer

Mr M Foley

Mark

IMPOTA/IMPOTA PLUS

Classes

05

Applicants

Menbruck Investment Company Ltd

Opponents

City Trading Ltd

Opposition

Sections 3(6) and 3(3)(a) Section 5(4)(a)

Result

Sections 3(3)(a) - Not pursued.

Section 3(6) - Opposition failed.

Section 5(4)(a) - In light of decision under Section 3(6) opposition on this ground failed.

Points Of Interest

• 1. Where the ground of opposition is under Section 3(6), there is an onus on the party making the allegation to substantiate their case.

Summary

Essential ground of opposition under Section 3(6). Both sides filed evidence but it was only of limited assistance in that it raised as many questions as it answered. Objection under Section 3(6) is a serious matter and places an onus of proof on the party making the allegation. In this case the Hearing Officer concluded that the opponents had not established a case of bad faith and therefore the opposition failed on this ground.

Full decision O/345/99 31Kb