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
-
FanFirm Pty Limited v Fanatics, LLC [2024] FCA 764
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY – trade marks – alleged infringement of registered marks under s 120 of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) – deceptive similarity – misleading or deceptive conduct – alleged breaches of s 18 and s 29(1)(g) and (h) of the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) – tort of passing off. TRADE MARKS – infringement…
-
Boost Tel Pty Ltd v Singtel Optus Pty Ltd [2023] FCA 213
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY – application for urgent interlocutory injunction – alleged infringement of trade mark – whether prima facie case of trade mark infringement – whether balance of convenience favours grant of interlocutory injunction – held: interlocutory injunction granted
-
Firstmac Limited v Zip Co Limited [2023] FCA 540
TRADE MARKS – infringement claim pursuant to s 120 of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) – whether the infringing marks are substantially identical with, or deceptively similar to, the applicant’s mark – defence under s 122(1)(f) and (fa) of the Act – whether respondents would obtain registration of the infringing marks if they were…
