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 >> TRANSFRAME (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2002] UKIntelP o32302 (8 August 2002) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2002/o32302.html Cite as: [2002] UKIntelP o32302 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
For the whole decision click here: o32302
Result
Section 3(6) - Opposition failed
Section 5(4)(a) - Opposition successful
Points Of Interest
Summary
Considering the matter under Section 3(6) the Hearing Officer came to the conclusion that the position in which the parties found themselves had come about as the result of a "board-room bust up" which did not relate to ownership of the mark or the registration of it. He was therefore unable to find that there had been bad faith.
The complications in the relationship between the parties also complicated the matter under Section 5(4)(a). The Hearing Officer however, eventually found that there was a protectable goodwill in the name TRANSFRAME, belonging to the firm ‘Norton Fabricators’, who were it was claimed joint owners of the mark together with Metalforce Ltd the opponents. On the basis of this the Hearing Officer found the opposition under Section 5(4)(a) successful - although he went on to remark that the applicants (who did not attend the hearing) might have been able to construct a defence of estoppel on the basis of an implied consent to their use of the mark.
