Trade mark decision

BL Number
Decision date
8 December 2003
Hearing Officer
Mr M Foley
09, 16, 35, 36, 37, 38, 42
Deutsche Telekom AG
Multicom Products Limited
Sections 5(2)(a); 5(2)(b) & 5(4)(a)


Section 5(2)(a): - Opposition dismissed.

Section 5(2)(b): - Opposition failed.

Section 5(4)(a): - Opposition partially successful.

Points Of Interest

  • 1. Identicality of marks : MultiCom not identical with MULTICOM
  • 2. Comparison of services.


The opposition, which was based on the mark MULTICOM, was confined to some only of the services in Classes 35, 38 and 42.

Because of very slight differences in type-face and stylization, the Hearing Officer found that the marks were not identical. The Section 5(2)(a) objection failed accordingly.

Under Section 5(2)(b) since the marks were so similar the matter essentially came down to a comparison of the services. These, the Hearing Officer decided should not "be regarded as being the same, or so closely allied as to be similar …". After reviewing the opponents' past use of the mark and adopting a 'global' approach, the Hearing Officer was of the opinion that there was no likelihood of confusion. The Section 5(2)(b) objection failed accordingly.

Under Section 5(4)(a), however, the Hearing Officer found the opponents successful in Classes 35 and 42, but not in Class 38.

The Hearing Officer made an award of costs to the opponents in view of their partial success.

Full decision O/387/03 PDF document64Kb