Trade mark decision

BL Number
Decision date
2 October 2001
Hearing Officer
Mr J MacGillivray
09, 35
Applicant for Declaration of Invalidity
Jonathan James Marquis
Registered Proprietor
Kenneth Stephen Bailey
Sections 47(2)(a) & 5(2)(b)


Section 47(2)(a)( & 5(2)(b): - Invalidity action failed.

Points Of Interest

  • Conceptual similarity is, on its own, generally insufficient to reach a conclusion on confusibility.


The applicant for invalidity owned an earlier registered mark, as compared to the mark at issue here, and claimed that they were confusingly similar within the terms of Section 5(2)(b). The earlier registration was for the mark CABVISION in Class 35.

Neither party claimed use of their marks so the Hearing Officer proceeded on the basis of notional and fair use. As identical services were at issue within Class 35 the Hearing Officer compared the respective marks CABVISION and TAXI VISION. The Hearing Officer found the marks to be different visually and orally but conceptually identical. However, conceptual similarity on its own is usually insufficient to reach a finding that marks are confusingly similar unless specific evidence has been filed to support the claim. Invalidity action failed

Full decision O/428/01 PDF document15Kb