If you found BAILII useful today, could you please make a contribution?
Your donation will help us maintain and extend our databases of legal information. No contribution is too small. If every visitor this month donates, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
For the whole decision click here: o01606
Result
Section 5(2)(b): - Opposition failed.
Points Of Interest
Summary
This opposition was based on the ownership by the opponent of the mark FEELINGS in respect of identical goods as those of the applicant. The opponent also filed some evidence as regards marks containing the string of letters "eelings" and pointed to the fact that the applicant had not filed any evidence of use to substantiate the claim made in its counterstatement that it had used its mark for many years.
Under Section 5(2)(b) the Hearing Officer noted that identical goods were at issue and that in comparing the respective marks the prominent element in the applicant's mark was the word KEELING'S. In comparing the respective marks FEELINGS and KEELING'S the Hearing Officer accepted that there was some similarity in the respective marks but the difference in the initial letters was significant and the marks were conceptually different. Overall there was a low level of similarity and the fact that alcoholic beverages were the goods at issue did not impact on the likelihood of confusion. Opposition failed.