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 >> OMERAN (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2004] UKIntelP o11304 (21 April 2004)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2004/o11304.html
Cite as: [2004] UKIntelP o11304

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


OMERAN (Trade Mark: Opposition) [2004] UKIntelP o11304 (21 April 2004)

For the whole decision click here: o11304

Trade mark decision

BL Number
O/113/04
Decision date
21 April 2004
Hearing officer
Mr Richard Arnold QC
Mark
OMERAN
Classes
05
Applicants/Appellants
Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited
Opponents/Respondents
Astrazeneca AB
Appeal to the Appointed Person against the decision of the Registrar’s Hearing Officer in opposition proceedings

Result

Appeal dismissed.

Points Of Interest

Summary

At first instance the Hearing Officer had found the opponents successful under Section 5(2)(b) in respect of both their marks OMEPRAL & OMEPAL (see BL O/347/03). The applicants appealed to the Appointed Person. First, they pointed out, the opponents had, prior to the hearing withdrawn their reliance on OMEPRAL. The Appointed Person agreed that it was regrettable that the decisions should have referred to a mark that was no longer in issue. Nonetheless, the Hearing Officer had clearly considered both marks separately and it could not be shown that his finding in respect of one had influenced his finding in respect of the other. The Appointed Person found no error of principle in the remainder of the decision and the appeal was dismissed.

The Appointed Person found no error of principle in the remainder of the decision and the appeal was dismissed.

The Appointed Person found no error of principle in the remainder of the decision and the appeal was dismissed.



BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIntelP/2004/o11304.html