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 >> TC TIMESHARE COUNCIL (Trade Mark: Invalidity) [2003] UKIntelP o39603 (19 December 2003)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2003/o39603.html
Cite as: [2003] UKIntelP o39603
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
TC TIMESHARE COUNCIL (Trade Mark: Invalidity) [2003] UKIntelP o39603 (19 December 2003)
For the whole decision click here: o39603
Trade mark decision
- BL Number
- O/396/03
- Decision date
- 19 December 2003
- Hearing officer
- Mr M Foley
- Mark
- TC TIMESHARE COUNCIL
- Classes
- 16, 35, 36, 41, 42
- Applicant for Invalidity
- Timeshare Council SL
- Registered Proprietor
- Timeshare Council
- Invalidity
- (1) Sections 47(1) & 2(b) based on Sections 3(6) & 5(4)(a) (2) Application of Res Judicata
Result
Res Judicata: - Application for invalidity dismissed.
Points Of Interest
- 1. See also BL O/406/01 (opposition proceedings) and BL O/372/02 (Appointed Person decision).
Summary
The background to these proceedings related to opposition proceedings in connection with the registered mark at issue here. In those proceedings the current applicants were unsuccessful. They appealed to the Appointed Person and sought leave to file further evidence. That application was refused.
When this application for invalidity was made it was noted that the same grounds were raised as were considered in the opposition proceedings. The Registrar gave a preliminary view that Res Judicata applied and the applicants requested a Hearing. The registered proprietors also attended.
The Hearing Officer reviewed the background to the proceedings and took particular note of the comments of the Appointed Person since the applicants indicated that they wished to rely on the evidence which had been refused in the earlier proceedings. As it was not clear that such evidence would be of importance and it was not apparent that substantial evidence was available and could be filed, the Hearing Officer concluded that Res Judicata applied.