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 >> PETPALS (Trade Mark: Invalidity) [2002] UKIntelP o48002 (27 November 2002)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2002/o48002.html
Cite as: [2002] UKIntelP o48002

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


PETPALS (Trade Mark: Invalidity) [2002] UKIntelP o48002 (27 November 2002)

For the whole decision click here: o48002

Trade mark decision

BL Number
O/480/02
Decision date
27 November 2002
Hearing officer
Dr W J Trott
Mark
PETPALS
Classes
42
Registered Proprietor
Mr James Rousou
Applicants for Declaration of Invaidity
Pals4Pets Limited
Application for Invalidation
Section 47 (Section 5(4)(a))

Result

Application for declaration of invalidity successful.

Points Of Interest

Summary

This was one of two related cross-invalidation actions; the other is set out in BL O/481/02 qv. The mark at issue in this case was applied for a few weeks before that of the applicants. Both proceeded to registration, without citation. The Hearing Officer deemed it better to deal with this mark first as the ‘earlier right’ claimed by the applicants was likely to be the critical issue.

The applicants in this case could show use of their mark PALS4PET since 1998. The registered proprietor contended that there was no protectable goodwill as of the relevant date; or such goodwill as there was, was geographically limited.

After an extensive review of the law and the facts the Hearing Officer concluded that the applicants had a goodwill, which could not be confined to an area; the marks at issue were confusing and were for identical or similar services. Damage would therefore follow and accordingly he found the applicants had made their case. The registration in suit was declared invalid and was deemed never to have been made.



BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2002/o48002.html