Hao Qi

Hao Qi opposed an application by Nick Wright for the removal of trade mark number 1682249, known as MICOCO, from the register. The application for removal was made under section 92 of the relevant Act. The hearing officer, Nicholas Smith, considered the discretion to allow a trade mark to remain on the register even if it has not been used.

The legal issue before the hearing officer was whether to exercise the discretion under section 101(3) of the Act to allow the MICOCO trade mark to remain registered for certain goods, despite the applicant's claim of non-use. This involved balancing the public interest in the integrity of the register with the private commercial interests of both the applicant and the registered proprietor.

The hearing officer noted that while the public interest in the integrity of the register is a guiding principle, the private commercial interests of the parties are also relevant. However, in this specific case, Hao Qi, the opponent and registered proprietor, provided no evidence of past, present, or future use, or any intention to use, the MICOCO trade mark on the goods for which removal was sought. Consequently, the hearing officer found it unlikely that the public would be affected by the removal of the trade mark for these unused goods, as it was not known to the public.

Accordingly, the hearing officer decided that the opposition was partly successful. The MICOCO trade mark would not be removed in its entirety but would be removed from the register in respect of certain goods, with the specifications of goods to be amended within one month of the decision. If an appeal was filed, the removal would be stayed pending the outcome of the appeal.