Trade mark decision

BL Number
Decision date
7 December 2006
Hearing Officer
Mr M Foley
Applicant for Revocation
BIBA + Pariscop Daud GmbH
Registered Proprietor
Hachel International Foundation
Section 46(1)(a) & (b)


Section 46(1)(a) & (b): Application partially successful. Specifications restricted to certain goods.

Points Of Interest

  • See also cases BL O/344/06 and BL O/348/06 to BL O/350/06 and BL O/349/06 to BL O/352/06


The specifications of the mark in suit cover the following goods:

Class 3 Perfumes, cosmetics, toilet preparations, preparations for the hair, soaps and dentifrices.

Class 14 Clocks and watches; jewellery; articles made of precious metal or coated therewith.

Class 25 Articles of clothing; footwear.

The mark in suit dates back to the 1960’s and was first coined by a Ms Barbara Hulanicki. The mark was acquired by the registered proprietor in 1975 and use after than date appears to have been intermittent. The application for revocation was filed on 20 January 2005 so the relevant five year period for showing use covers the period 21 January 2000 to 20 January 2005.

The registered proprietor filed evidence of use of the mark in suit but the use shown was not clear cut and the evidence was not well focused. However, the Hearing Officer accepted that there had been use of a mark incorporating the word BIBA (the word BIBA used with an art deco swirl device) in respect of a range of cosmetics (Class 3), jewellery (Class 14) and articles of outer clothing and shoes (Class 25). Taking account of the use of the mark BIBA & device and how it was referred to in newspaper advertisements and articles, the Hearing Officer accepted that the use shown was sufficient to protect the registration of BIBA in respect of the following goods:

Class 3 Cosmetics.

Class 14 Jewellery; all made of gold or silver.

Class 25 Outer clothing; shoes.

The Hearing Officer ordered that the specifications of the mark in suit be restricted accordingly.

Full decision O/349/06 PDF document97Kb