Deceptive similarity of trade marks established where a later mark substantially copied the registered mark and breached an injunction.

The mark 'OSSO' was found deceptively similar to 'ESSCO' because the goods were identical, the relevant purchasers were ordinary users including illiterate buyers, and the comparison of phonetic, visual and structural features showed substantial appropriation of the registered mark. The difference in the opening vowel was held insufficient to avoid confusion. The dishonest adoption of the mark supported a finding of infringement and also constituted disobedience of the compromise decree that restrained use of any deceptively similar mark for sanitary and bathroom fittings.

---

---

Issues: Whether the mark 'OSSO' was deceptively similar to the registered mark 'ESSCO' and whether its use amounted to disobedience of the decree for permanent injunction.

Analysis: The compromise decree restrained infringement of the registered mark by use of the impugned or any deceptively similar mark in relation to sanitary and bathroom fittings. In determining deceptive similarity, the relevant considerations were the nature of the marks, their phonetic and visual resemblance, the identity of the goods, the class of purchasers, and the mode of purchase. The goods were identical and were likely to be bought by ordinary purchasers, including illiterate users, who would rely on general recollection rather than exact detail. On a structural comparison, 'OSSO' was held to have taken a substantial part of 'ESSCO', and the difference in the initial vowel was not sufficient to dispel confusion. The adoption of the mark was also found to be dishonest, supporting the inference of infringement and breach of the decree.

Conclusion: The mark 'OSSO' was held deceptively similar to 'ESSCO', and the judgment-debtors were held to have disobeyed the decree.

---