Trade mark decision

BL Number
Decision date
21 November 2000
Hearing Officer
Mr M Reynolds
Dr August Wolff GmbH & Co Arzneimittel
Diomed Developments Limited


Section 5(2)(b) - Opposition successful

Points Of Interest

  • None


The opponents opposition was based on their registered mark PSORIDERM in Class 5 and use of that mark on a modest scale. Applicants claimed that PSORI was descriptive in relation to preparations for the treatment of psoriasis; also that there are a number of marks registered in the UK with the PSORI prefix including PSORIN, PSORIGEL, PSORIDERM and PSORIGON.

When comparing the respective marks the Hearing Officer noted that the evidence established that identical goods were at issue; that PSORI was not descriptive though it was likely to be seen as alluding to psoriasis and that the opponents did not have a monopoly in the PSORI prefix. Nevertheless the Hearing Officer concluded that the marks were essentially the same length, had elements in common and were visually similar and had some conceptional similarity. Overall the Hearing Officer decided that there was a likelihood of confusion and that the opposition succeeded.

Full decision O/422/00 PDF document20Kb