TRADE MARKS – appeal – where primary judge found that the respondent had not infringed the second appellant’s registered trade marks – whether primary judge erred in finding that the word mark THE NORTH AGENCY used by the respondent was not deceptively similar to the second appellant’s registered trade mark – no error established – appeal dismissed
Recent cases about trademarks
-
Hugo Boss AG v Hardge [2024] FCA 1325
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for default judgment pursuant to r 5.23(2)(c) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) – where substituted service orders made – where respondent in default of appearance – allegations of trade mark infringement, misleading and deceptive conduct and passing off – whether the applicant is entitled to relief – relief…
-
The Practice Pty Ltd v The Practice Business Advisers & Tax Practitioners Pty Ltd [2024] FCA 1299
TRADE MARKS – infringement claim pursuant to s 120 of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) (the Act) – whether the respondent used the plain word mark THE PRACTICE as a trade mark – whether the respondent’s marks are substantially identical with, or deceptively similar to, the applicant’s mark – defence under s 122(1)(b)(i)…
-
Koninklijke Douwe Egberts BV v Cantarella Bros Pty Ltd [2024] FCA 1277
TRADE MARKS — shape marks – where the first applicant is the registered owner of a trade mark constituted by the shape of a cylindrical container with a stopper in Class 30 over coffee and instant coffee (the KDE shape mark) – where the respondent (Cantarella) released a 400-gram instant coffee product under its brand…
Original article available at: https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/full/2023/2023fcafc0203
For more information, see the original judgement.
