Trade mark decision

BL Number: O/347/99
Decision date: 8 October 1999
Hearing Officer: Mr M Foley
Mark: HE TO SHE
Classes: 16, 42
Applicants: Mapleleaf Holdings Ltd
Opponents: The National Magazine Company Ltd
Opposition: Section 3(1)(a) Section 3(3)(b), 3(6) Section 5(2), 5(3) and 5(4)(a)

Result

Section 3(1)(a) - Opposition failed. Mark found to be capable of distinguishing.

Section 3(3)(b) & 3(6) - Opposition failed. Opponents claims not substantiated by evidence.

Section 5(2) - Opposition failed. Respective marks not confusingly similar.

Section 5(3) & 5(4)(a) - Same as under 5(2).

Points Of Interest

1. Decision of interest due to the fact that even though the opponents mark is included within the applicants mark, the marks HE TO SHE and SHE were found not to be confusingly similar.

Summary

Mark found to be capable of distinguishing since there was no evidence filed to indicate that it is generic or that other traders wish to use the term. Opponents grounds of objection under Sections 3(3)(b) and 3(6) not substantiated by evidence and therefore dismissed. Under Section 5(2) the opponents opposition based on ownership and reputation in their mark SHE. Goods the same (in Class 16) but marks HE TO SHE and SHE found not to be confusingly similar. Opposition under 5(3) and 5(4)(a) failed for the same reason.

Full decision O/347/99 55Kb