For the whole decision click here: o24207
Result
Section 5(4)(a): Opposition successful.
Points Of Interest
Summary
The opponent provided evidence to show that it has traded under the marks TOOLMAN and TOOLMAN and device from 1997 onwards in respect of a range of tools and hand tools which are the same and similar goods as those of the applicant. While such user was modest in business terms and advertising was not extensive, the Hearing Officer accepted that by the relevant date, the date of application for registration by the applicant, the opponent had a protectable goodwill in the mark TOOLMAN in relation to a range of hand tools and tools for use with power tools.
The Hearing officer went on to conclude that under the terms of Section 5(4)(a) there would be confusion if the applicant used its mark with consequent damage to the opponent’s trade. Opposition thus succeeded.