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 >> PERFECT 10 (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2002] UKIntelP o52102 (17 December 2002)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2002/o52102.html
Cite as: [2002] UKIntelP o52102
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
PERFECT 10 (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2002] UKIntelP o52102 (17 December 2002)
For the whole decision click here: o52102
Trade mark decision
- BL Number
- O/521/02
- Decision date
- 17 December 2002
- Hearing officer
- Mr A James
- Mark
- PERFECT 10
- Classes
- 03
- Applicant
- Original Additions (Beauty Products) Limited
- Opponent
- Perfect 10 Inc
- Opposition
- Sections 5(2)(b) & 5(4)(a)
Result
Section 5(2)(b) - Opposition failed
Section 5(4)(a) - Opposition failed
Points Of Interest
- Similarity of goods/services; "Goods do not have to be dissimilar in every conceivable respect before they can be considered to be dissimilar overall."
Summary
The opposition was based on a CTM registration in Classes 9, 16 and 41 and the opponents’ magazine PERFECT 10. The Hearing Officer dealt first with the case under Section 5(4)(a). In the result he found that the applicants’ use at the relevant date had not been shown to amount to a misrepresentation. That ground of opposition therefore failed. Under Section 5(2)(b) he found that the goods and services were dissimilar, or at least, the opponents had not satisfied him that, overall, they could be considered similar.
The opposition failed under Section 5(2) accordingly, but the Hearing Officer went on to record that even if he were wrong in his finding regarding similarity, the similarity was in his view so slight that he would not be able to find a likelihood of confusion.