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 >> ECOSOLDER SENJU METAL INDUSTRY CO. LTD (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2003] UKIntelP o32903 (30 October 2003)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2003/o32903.html
Cite as: [2003] UKIntelP o32903

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


ECOSOLDER SENJU METAL INDUSTRY CO. LTD (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2003] UKIntelP o32903 (30 October 2003)

For the whole decision click here: o32903

Trade mark decision

BL Number
O/329/03
Decision date
30 October 2003
Hearing officer
Mr J MacGillivray
Mark
ECOSOLDER SENJU METAL INDUSTRY CO. LTD
Classes
01, 06
Applicant
Senju Metal Industry Co Ltd
Opponent
Multicore Solders Limited
Opposition
Section 5(2)(b)

Result

Section 5(2)(b): - Opposition failed.

Points Of Interest

Summary

The opponent’s opposition was based on their ownership of registrations of their mark ECOSOL in respect of identical goods. The opponent also claimed use of their mark for some ten years but this use was not well proved or specific and the Hearing Officer was unable to conclude that the opponent had an enhanced reputation in their mark.

Under Section 5(2)(b) it was common ground that identical goods were at issue. Also the applicant admitted that ECO SOLDER was descriptive in relation to environmentally friendly solder products whereas the opponent’s mark ECOSOL was an invented word. The Hearing Officer concluded that the respective marks were not confusingly similar nor were they likely to be associated as the corporate name of the applicant was included in the mark. The opponent thus failed in their opposition.



BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2003/o32903.html