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 >> HYDROGARDEN (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2001] UKIntelP o46501 (24 October 2001) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2001/o46501.html Cite as: [2001] UKIntelP o46501 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
For the whole decision click here: o46501
Result
Section 5(2)(b) - Opposition successful; specification amended
Section 5(4)(a) - No formal finding
Points Of Interest
Summary
The opposition was based on the opponents’ use and registration (in Class 1) of the mark HYDRO. At the hearing the opponents made it clear that their opposition was confined to nutrients and fertilisers in Class 1. The applicants conceded the latter but maintained their wish to have nutrients retained in the specification, claiming that there was a difference between these products. The Hearing Officer reviewed the matter under Section 5(2)(b) and found a likelihood of confusion. He considered the terms ‘fertilizers’, ‘nutrients’ and ‘growth promoters’ to be synonymous. The application was to be allowed to proceed provided the Class 1 specification was suitably amended.
