IPO The opposition was based on the opponents’ CTM ‘BRILLIANCE’, registered in respect of ‘electrical cables and wires; electronic cables and wires; microphone cables for sound and audio applications’. The marks being identical the Hearing Officer proceeded to a comparison of the goods. In the result, he concluded that there was ‘a considerable difference between an extremely complex piece of advanced medical equipment and a piece of cable’ the opposition failed accordingly.
Citations:
[2007] UKIntelP o22307
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Intellectual Property
Updated: 20 October 2022; Ref: scu.456741