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 >>
SMIRNOFF ICE (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2001] UKIntelP o52401 (23 November 2001)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2001/o52401.html
Cite as:
[2001] UKIntelP o52401
[
New search]
[
Printable PDF version]
[
Help]
SMIRNOFF ICE (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2001] UKIntelP o52401 (23 November 2001)
For the whole decision click here: o52401
Trade mark decision
- BL Number
- O/524/01
- Decision date
- 23 November 2001
- Hearing officer
- Mr M Knight
- Mark
- SMIRNOFF ICE
- Classes
- 33
- Applicants
- UDV North America Inc
- Opponents
- Zakritoe Aktsionernoe Obchtchestvo Zakritogo Tipa "Torgovy" Dom Potomkov Postavchtchika Dvora Ego Imperatorskago Velitschestva P.A. Smirnova
- Opposition
- Sections 3(3)(b); 3(4) & 3(6)
Result
Section 3(3)(b) - Opposition failed
Section 3(4) - Opposition failed
Section 3(6) - Opposition failed
Points Of Interest
-
1. "In relation to Section 3(3)(b) there must be something inherent within the trade mark sufficient to mislead the public to a material extent before a positive finding can be made."
-
2. "Insofar as Section 46(1)(d) is concerned ..... I look sensibly at the matter, no looking for the slightest misrepresentation but considering the matter in the round."
Summary
Note: This was one of five actions, concerning 18 marks involving the same parties and heard over two days. The central and common feature of all these disputes was the marks SMIRNOFF or its equivalent in Cyrillic script.
Under the various Sections of the Act cited in the opposition the Hearing Officer found that the mark was not likely to deceive (Section 3(3)(b)), was not a trade descriptions and hence not barred by the Trade Descriptions Act (Section 3(4)), and was not the result of a claim to proprietorship made in bad faith (Section 3(6)).
The opposition failed on all grounds.