Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office Decisions >> BECLOGEN (Trade Mark: Opposition) [1999] UKIntelP o38199 (2 November 1999)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/1999/o38199.html
Cite as: [1999] UKIntelP o38199
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
BECLOGEN (Trade Mark: Opposition) [1999] UKIntelP o38199 (2 November 1999)
For the whole decision click here: o38199
Trade mark decision
- BL Number
- O/381/99
- Decision date
- 2 November 1999
- Hearing officer
- Mr M Foley
- Mark
- BECLOGEN
- Classes
- 09
- Applicants
- Generics (UK) Ltd
- Opponents
- Norton Healthcare Limited
- Opposition
- Section 3(1) Section 3(6) Section 5(2)(b)
Result
Section 3(1) - Opposition failed. No evidence filed in support of this ground.
Section 3(6) - Not pursued.
Section 5(2)(b) - Opposition failed. Respective marks not confusingly similar.
Points Of Interest
- 1. Use of similar marks by a number of proprietors may indicate that the public have learned to distinguish the goods from different suppliers. This may impact on the H/O's consideration of the likelihood of confusing similarity in particular cases.
Summary
The opponents opposition based on registration and use of their marks BECLAZONE and CROMOGEN in respect of the same goods as those of interest to the applicant - namely products to treat asthma and based on the product Beclomethasone Dipropionate. The opponents filed evidence to show that they had a reputation in their marks but the applicants filed evidence to show that other BECLO marks are in use in relation to the goods at issue - namely BECLO-AQUA, BECLOFORTE, BECLOFORTE EASI-BREATHE, BECLAFORTE INTEGRA and BECLOMIST. The Hearing Officer concluded, in all the circumstances, that the marks BECLOGEN and BECLAZONE are not confusingly similar.