Trade mark decision

BL Number

O/113/04

Decision date

21 April 2004

Hearing officer

Mr Richard Arnold QC

Mark

OMERAN

Classes

05

Applicants/Appellants

Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited

Opponents/Respondents

Astrazeneca AB

Appeal to the Appointed Person against the decision of the Registrar’s Hearing Officer in opposition proceedings

Result

Appeal dismissed.

Points Of Interest

• 1. The fact that the decision referred to two marks when one had been withdrawn did not invalidate the findings as the marks had been given separate consideration.

Summary

At first instance the Hearing Officer had found the opponents successful under Section 5(2)(b) in respect of both their marks OMEPRAL & OMEPAL (see BL O/347/03). The applicants appealed to the Appointed Person. First, they pointed out, the opponents had, prior to the hearing withdrawn their reliance on OMEPRAL. The Appointed Person agreed that it was regrettable that the decisions should have referred to a mark that was no longer in issue. Nonetheless, the Hearing Officer had clearly considered both marks separately and it could not be shown that his finding in respect of one had influenced his finding in respect of the other. The Appointed Person found no error of principle in the remainder of the decision and the appeal was dismissed.

The Appointed Person found no error of principle in the remainder of the decision and the appeal was dismissed.

The Appointed Person found no error of principle in the remainder of the decision and the appeal was dismissed.