TRADE MARKS – application for leave to appeal from judgment of a single judge of the Court pursuant to s 195(2) of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) (the Act) – where primary judge dismissed an appeal from the decision of a delegate of the Registrar of Trade Marks in opposition proceedings – where delegate granted respondent’s application under s 92(4)(b) of the Act to remove the applicant’s registered trade mark MOTHERLAND from the Register for non-use – whether primary judge erred in finding applicant had not used MOTHERLAND as a trade mark – whether primary judge erred in finding applicant had not used MOTHERLAND as a trade mark during the relevant non-use period – no error established – application for leave to appeal dismissed
TRADE MARKS – application for leave to appeal from judgment of a single judge of the Court pursuant to s 195(2) of the Act – where primary judge dismissed an appeal from the decision of a delegate of the Registrar of Trade Marks in opposition proceedings – where delegate found that applicant had not established grounds of opposition under ss 44, 60 and 42(b) of the Act to the respondent’s application to register MOTHERSKY – whether primary judge erred in failing to find that “coffee” and “non-alcoholic beverages” are similar goods within the meaning of s 44(1) of the Act – whether primary judge erred in finding that MOTHERSKY is not deceptively similar to MOTHER within the meaning of s 44(1) – whether primary judge erred in failing to find that use of MOTHERSKY in respect of “coffee” would be likely to deceive or cause confusion due to the reputation of MOTHER – error established – application for leave to appeal granted – appeal allowed
Related cases – trademarks
-
ETO Group PL v ETO Gruppe Technologies GmbH [2025] FCA 1253
TRADE MARKS – appeal from decision of delegate of the Registrar of Trade Marks in an application for removal of the trade mark the subject of this appeal from the Register of Trade Marks pursuant to subs 92(4)(a) and (b) of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) – non-use – where respondent filed a submitting notice…
-
Progressive Green Pty Ltd v Flo Energy Pty Ltd [2025] FCA 1315
TRADE MARKS – application for removal from Register due to lack of good faith use under s 92(4)(b) of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) – whether use as a trade mark over the relevant four-day period – whether use in relation to relevant class of goods – whether use in good faith – where…
-
Thomas v Monsoon Group Pty Ltd [2025] FCA 911
TRADE MARKS – non-use – where the respondent brought a non-use action before the Registrar of Trade Marks (the Registrar) pursuant to s 92(4)(b) of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) (the Act) – whether to grant the applicant an extension of time to appeal decision of the Registrar’s delegate under r 34.25 of the Federal Court Rules…
