Trade mark decision

BL Number
Decision date
5 December 2001
Hearing Officer
Mr G Salthouse
Pacific Sunwear of California
Head Sport Aktiengesellschaft
Sections 5(2)(b), 5(3) & 5(4)(a)


Section 5(2)(b) - Opposition failed

Section 5(3) - Opposition failed

Section 5(4)(a) - Opposition failed

Points Of Interest

  • None


The opponents opposition was based on their ownership of a registration for the mark HEAD in class 25 in respect of articles of clothing. They also claimed use of their mark and their evidence showed that the mark HEAD was used as a prominent element when combined with other in-house marks or logos. The evidence showed reasonable use; particularly in relation to tennis and ski clothing, but there was insufficient detail to establish that the opponents had an above average reputation in their mark.

Under Section 5(2)(b) the Hearing Officer noted that identical goods were at issue and went on to compare the respective marks and found them to be quite different. He thought it unlikely that the public would see the mark at issue as the house mark HEAD combined with another mark BULL. He concluded therefore, that there was no realistic likelihood of confusion at the relevant date, likewise under Sections 5(3) and 5(4)(a) he decided that the opponents also failed because of the difference in the respective marks and because of a lack of a proved reputation.

Full decision O/542/01 PDF document21Kb