Trade mark decision

BL Number
Decision date
20 December 2001
Hearing Officer
Mr R A Jones
29, 30, 32, 42
Helshaw Food products Limited
The Southland Corporation
Sections 3(1)(a); 3(1)(b); 5(2)(b); 5(3); 5(4)(a) & 56


Section 3(1)(a) - Opposition failed

Section 3(1)(b) - Opposition successful

Section 5(2)(b) - Opposition failed

Section 5(3) - Opposition failed

Section 5(4)(a) - Opposition failed

Points Of Interest

  • No evidence filed under Section 3(1)(b), but opposition successful.


The Hearing Officer could find no objection to the mark under Section 3(1)(a); but he upheld the objection to the mark under Section 3(1)(b). He gave as his view that “24-7 or equivalent is an entirely normal way of designating an essential characteristic of the services ie available twenty-four hours a day and seven days a week “and he thought this could apply to the goods also.

This decided the matter but he went on to consider the matter under Sections 5(2)(b); 5(3); 5(4) and 56. Under these Sections the opponents cited a number of registered marks, but under Section 5(2)(b) the Hearing Officer considered that their strongest case lay in their mark 7-ELEVEN, registered for all goods in Class 30. This involved identical goods. The marks were not identical, and the hearing Officer eventually decided that there was no likelihood of confusion. This effectively decided the matter under Sections 5(3) and 5(4)(a) and 56 also.

Full decision O/579/01 PDF document33Kb