The opposition was based on the opponents’ mark, a telephone on wheels, registered in respect of identical or similar services, principally insurance services.
In the result the Hearing Officer found the opposition to have succeeded under Sections 5(2)(b) and 5(3). He did not go on to make a finding under Section 5(4)(a) and he postponed a decision on costs pending receipt of written submissions on the matter.
[2006] UKIntelP o36306
Bailii
England and Wales
Updated: 19 October 2021; Ref: scu.454915