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 >> CARSMART (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2004] UKIntelP o25104 (16 August 2004) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2004/o25104.html Cite as: [2004] UKIntelP o25104 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
For the whole decision click here: o25104
Result
Section 5(2)(b) - Opposition failed
Section 5(4)(a) - Opposition failed
Points Of Interest
Summary
The opposition was based on a number of registrations of marks consisting of or incorporating the word SMART.
The Hearing Officer found the Class 12 goods (motor vehicles) to be identical; he did not consider the Class 35 services (an internet web site specializing in the sale of motor vehicles) to be similar to the opponent’s Class 12 goods. He went on to compare the marks SMART v CARSMART. Overall, said the Hearing Officer, the differences in these marks outweighed the similarities. On a global appreciation there was no likelihood of confusion. The Sections 5(2)(b) objection failed accordingly.
The Hearing Officer went on to consider the matter under Sections 5(4)(a), but his finding under Section 5(2)(b) respecting the likelihood of confusion had effectively decided the matter since the necessary misrepresentation would not occur.
