For the whole decision click here: o40103
Result
Section 5(2)(b) - Opposition successful.
Section 5(4)(a) - Opposition partially successful.
Points Of Interest
Summary
The opposition was based on marks which, in essence, comprised wine labels showing the words SAO PEDRO together with other written material.
Taking first the objection under Section 5(2)(b) the Hearing Officer found goods both identical and similar to be involved.
The marks too were similar, he found; the 1865 element would, he thought, be seen merely as a date. After considering other relevant matters the Hearing Officer considered that there existed a likelihood of confusion. The fact that the applicants already had a registration of SAN PEDRO, which the Hearing Officer described as "a slightly odd circumstance", did not provide a defence; the opponents could be minded to take invalidity action.
The opposition under Section 5(2)(b) succeeded.
This opposition under Section 5(4)(a), had it still been crucial, could only have succeeded to the extent of an exclusion of 'port' from the applicants' specification.