BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, 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!
 |
[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 >> MINERVA (Trade Mark: Opposition) [1998] UKIntelP o17698 (27 August 1998) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/1998/o17698.html Cite as: [1998] UKIntelP o17698 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
For the whole decision click here: o17698
Result
Request to suspend proceedings: - Request refused.
Request for an extension of time: - Request allowed.
Points Of Interest
Summary
The applicants mark had been published for opposition purposes on 12 March 1997. The opponents had filed opposition and their evidence and the applicants evidence was due on 24 January 1998. A request for a three month extension of time was disputed and a period to 6 March 1998 was allowed. On 9 March a request was made for suspension pending the outcome of co-pending Revocation/Invalidity proceedings; alternatively a further request for an extension of time until 24 July was requested.
The Hearing took place on 28 May 1998. After hearing submissions from both parties the Hearing Officer was not satisfied that the outcome of the Revocation/Invalidity proceedings would necessarily settle these opposition proceedings. Thus he refused the requested suspension.
As regards the late filed request for an extension of time the Hearing Officer noted that it was not the Registrar’s practice to penalise a party because of an error by their professional advisors. He thus agreed to consider the request. The applicants explained that because their evidence covered an extended period it had been necessary to trace staff who had left the company some years previously and it had been necessary to search and recover material from storage.
The evidence was now complete and ready for filing and, as the Hearing Officer accepted that the applicants had acted diligently, he agreed to accept the evidence into the proceedings.
