Trade mark decision

BL Number
O/363/99
Decision date
15 October 1999
Hearing Officer
Mr M Reynolds
Mark
VERBATIM
Classes
01
Applicants
Chemence Ltd
Opponents
Verbatim Corporation
Opposition
Section 5(2), 5(3) and 5(4)

Result

Section 5(2) - Opposition failed. Respective goods clearly not similar.

Section 5(3) - Opposition failed. Respective goods clearly not similar.

Section 5(4)(a) - Opposition failed. Respective goods clearly not similar.

Points Of Interest

  • None.

Summary

The opponents base their opposition on their registered VERBATIM marks in Class 9 and use of such marks in relation to CD disks, toner cartridges, inks for printers and accessories for use with computers.

Essential ground considered by the Hearing Officer to be 5(4)(a) (passing off) but he concluded that the opponents had not established by their evidence the likelihood of confusion because of the difference in the respective goods at issue; specialised chemical preparations in Class 1 and the goods listed above.

Section 5(3) also dealt with in some detail as the respective marks at issue are essentially identical but again the Hearing Officer concluded that the opponents had not shown any likelihood of damage to the distinctive character of their mark if the applicants mark was registered for the goods applied for. Opposition failed.

Full decision O/363/99 PDF document38Kb