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!



BAILII [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 >> SYNERGIE (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2002] UKIntelP o30602 (31 July 2002)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2002/o30602.html
Cite as: [2002] UKIntelP o30602

[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]


SYNERGIE (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2002] UKIntelP o30602 (31 July 2002)

For the whole decision click here: o30602

Trade mark decision

BL Number
O/306/02
Decision date
31 July 2002
Hearing officer
Mr J MacGillivray
Mark
SYNERGIE
Classes
35, 41
Applicants
Sidergie
Opponents
The Synergy Group Limited
Opposition
Section 3(6)

Result

Section 3(6) - Opposition failed.

Points Of Interest

Summary

The opponents opposition was based on a claim that the applicants had not used their mark in the UK up to the present, even though four years has elapsed since the application for registration was filed. They also pointed to the wide specifications claimed and disputed that the applicants’ had an intention to use their mark in relation to all the services listed.

The applicants confirmed their intention to trade in the UK and confirmed that contact had already been made with the Temporary Employment Trade Federation and a number of UK companies. The applicants stated that their mark is currently in use in Spain, Italy, Czech Republic, Slovakia and Canada.

The Hearing Officer noted the applicants current use and their intention to trade in the UK. As there is no requirement to trade before registration is achieved - and even then five years is allowed to put a mark into use before rectification becomes available to an applicant - the Hearing had little difficulty in deciding that the opponents failed in their opposition under Section 3(6).



BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2002/o30602.html