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 >> AFTER SEX MINTS (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2002] UKIntelP o09002 (25 February 2002) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2002/o09002.html Cite as: [2002] UKIntelP o09002, [2002] UKIntelP o9002 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
For the whole decision click here: o09002
Result
Section 5(2)(b) - Opposition failed
Points Of Interest
Summary
The opponents opposition was based on their ownership of registrations for the mark AFTER EIGHT in respect of the same goods as those of the applicant. They also filed details of extensive use and promotion of the mark AFTER EIGHT and the Hearing Officer accepted that they had a significant reputation in that mark.
Under Section 5(2)(b) the Hearing Officer noted that identical goods were at issue and went on to compare the respective marks AFTER EIGHT and AFTER SEX MINTS. He also noted from the evidence filed by the opponents that their mark was sometime promoted and used in the style AFTER EIGHT MINTS. The Hearing Officer accepted that there was a degree of similarity both visually and aurally but noted that the words SEX and EIGHT were very different words and thus the marks as totalities were rather different conceptually. The Hearing Officer did not discount the fact that the applicants mark might being to mind the opponents mark but he did not believe that there was any likelihood of confusion between the respective marks. Opposition thus failed.
