For the whole decision click here: o16700
Result
Section 3(3)(b) - Opposition successful
Award of Costs - Award of Costs confirmed
Points Of Interest
Summary
In his decision dated 30 November 1999 (SRIS O/421/99) the Hearing Officer had decided that the opponents succeeded in their ground of opposition under Section 3(3)(b) in that the mark at issue here would be deceptive if the goods did not originate from Paris. However, he indicated to the applicant that his application could proceed if the specification of goods was limited as follows:
"All the aforementioned goods being produced in Paris or being perfumed with perfume produced in Paris"
Because the opponents succeeded in their opposition the Hearing Officer awarded them costs of £800.
The applicant agreed to amend his application but appealed to the Appointed Person re the award of costs. The applicant argued that a proposal to restrict his application had been turned down by the opponents before the hearing. As they appeared to be content with the restriction imposed by the Hearing Officer they should not have been awarded costs.
The Appointed Person reviewed the papers and the Hearing Officer’s decision. He concluded that the limitation proposed by the applicant prior to the hearing had not nearly been as restricted as that ordered by the Hearing Officer. He did not therefore see any grounds to intervene as regards the award of costs made by the Hearing Officer. He awarded an additional £100 to the opponents in relation to the appeal and his own hearing.