Unilever Plc v. Distribrands Cosmetics BV

Unilever Plc

Case details

Plaintiff: Unilever Plc

Case no.: O/256/08

Jurisdiction: United Kingdom

Industry: Retail

Decision date: 15 Sep, 2008


Under Section 5(2)(b) the Hearing Officer compared the respective marks TEASE and TEEZE and concluded that while there are strong visual differences because TEASE is a well known word, the marks are phonetically identical. Also because the mark TEEZE would bring to mind the word TEASE there was a strong likelihood of conceptual identity. The Hearing Officer went on to conclude that there was a likelihood of confusion of the public and that the opposition succeeded.

Comparison of Trademarks