British
and Irish Legal Information Institute
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 >>
BUD (Trade Mark: Revocation) [2001] UKIntelP o07101 (13 February 2001)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2001/o07101.html
Cite as:
[2001] UKIntelP o07101,
[2001] UKIntelP o7101
[
New search]
[
Printable PDF version]
[
Help]
BUD (Trade Mark: Revocation) [2001] UKIntelP o07101 (13 February 2001)
For the whole decision click here: o07101
Trade mark decision
- BL Number
- O/071/01
- Decision date
- 13 February 2001
- Hearing officer
- Mr A James
- Mark
- BUD
- Classes
- 32
- Registered proprietor
- Budejovicky Budvar Narodni Podnik
- Opponent
- Anheuser-Busch Inc
- Opposition
- Section 46(1)(b)
Result
Section 46(1)(b): - Application for revocation failed.
Points Of Interest
-
1. The Hearing Officer’s decision was appealed to the Appointed Person. In his decision dated 2 November 2001 (BL O/504/01) the Appointed Person referred the case to the High Court as he considered that a point of general legal importance was at issue.
-
2. In the High Court before Simon Thorley QC (Deputy Judge). This case was heard with BL O/178/01 (Revocation of BUDWEISER BUDBRAU) and BL O/200/01 (Application for invalidity in respect of mark BUD). In the matter of this case the Hearing Officer’s decision was upheld. (See BUD and BUDWEISER BUDBRAU Trade Marks [2002] RPC 38 page 747).
-
3. The applicant appealed to the Court of Appeal. Again the Hearing Officer’s decision was upheld. (See BUD and BUDWEISER BUDBRAU Trade Marks [2003] RPC 25 page 477).
Summary
A complex case came down to certain key issues : was use of the mark in capital letters use of the registered mark; was the use of “Bud-Budweis-Budweiser” use of three marks or one composite mark; was the use of Bud, use in relation to beer; was the nature and scale of use “genuine use” of the registered mark? The Hearing Officer resolved these questions in favour of the registered proprietor.