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 >> PARNAS CORDON BLANCO (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2000] UKIntelP o19200 (6 June 2000) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2000/o19200.html Cite as: [2000] UKIntelP o19200 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
For the whole decision click here: o19200
Result
Section 5(2)(b) - Opposition successful
Section 5(4)(a) - Opposition successful
Sections 3(3)(b) & 3(b) - Not pursued or considered
Points Of Interest
Summary
The Opponents owned a number of label registrations incorporating the words CORDON ROUGE, GRAND CORDON, CORDON ROSE, CORDON VERT etc and they also owned the word marks CORDON ROUGE and GRAND CORDON. Significant user was claimed as far back as 1885. The applicant claimed that the opponents marks were always used with a house mark and thus the marks as registered and used were less distinctive in the context of the overall mark. By reference to the Register of Trade Marks they sought to show that others used the word CORDON in relation to the same or similar goods.
Under Section 5(2)(b) the Hearing Officer compared a CORDON ROUGE label (which included the house mark G H MUMM & Co in smaller lettering and a stripe device) with the applicants CORDON BLANCO label incorporating PARNAS in smaller lettering and a stripe device. CORDON ROUGE means red ribbon and CORDON BLANCO means white ribbon and the Hearing Officer concluded that there was a likelihood of confusion of the public. A similar finding also applied to the other marks applied for.
With regard to Section 5(4)(a) - Passing Officer - The Hearing Officer noted that the opponents had established a significant reputation in the family or series of CORDON plus the colour ROUGE, ROSE and VERT marks and went on to conclude that misrepresentation or confusion could occur if the applicants were to use their marks.
