RE MITA KOGYO KABUSHIKI KAISHA

RE MITA KOGYO KABUSHIKI KAISHA

Applying the business‑sense test and weighing nature, uses and trade channels, the court concluded copiers and computers were not goods of the same description and, on the evidence, registration would not create a real tangible danger of confusion; therefore the Registrar's decision to allow registration was upheld and the appeal dismissed.

Citation
RE MITA KOGYO KABUSHIKI KAISHA
Parties
Appellant / Opponent: Mita Kogyo Kabushiki Kaisha; Respondent / Applicant: MITAC Inc
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
6 July 1992
Case Number
HCMP2835/1990
Procedural Posture
Trade Mark Registration Opposition Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Registrar's Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Registration, Opposition, Likelihood of Confusion, Goods of the Same Description, Deference to Registrar
Source Language
EN
Trade Mark Law Intellectual Property Commercial Law Registration Opposition Likelihood of Confusion Goods of the Same Description Deference to Registrar

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mita Kogyo Kabushiki Kaisha

Appellant / Opponent

MITAC Inc

Respondent / Applicant

Procedural Posture

Trade Mark Registration Opposition Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Registrar's Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant's goods (computers, disk drives, electronic components) are goods of the same description as the opponent's goods (copiers and copying machines) for the purpose of s.20 Cap.43
  2. 2 Whether registration of the mark would create a real tangible danger of confusion or imperfect recollection leading to doubt about common trade origin
  3. 3 The weight to be given to the Registrar's decision

Ratio Decidendi

Applying the business‑sense test and weighing nature, uses and trade channels, the court concluded copiers and computers were not goods of the same description and, on the evidence, registration would not create a real tangible danger of confusion; therefore the Registrar's decision to allow registration was upheld and the appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Parties to be heard on costs