Lawyers for litigation

The Practice Pty Ltd v The Practice Business Advisers & Tax Practitioners Pty Ltd [2024] FCA 1299

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) of the Act – whether the respondent used its logo in good faith to indicate the kind, quality or intended purpose of the services it offers – defence under s 122(1)(f) or (fa) of the Act – whether the respondent would obtain registration of its logo under s 44(3)(a) or (b) of the Act — where respondent’s use of its logo was not in good faith or honest due to inadequate searches – defences not made out – claim allowed – declaratory and injunctive relief granted — damages of $200,000 awarded, including $100,000 in additional damages


Related trade mark cases

  • Caporaso Pty Ltd v Mercato Centrale Australia Pty Ltd [2024] FCAFC 156

    TRADE MARKS — s 62(b) of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) – where an Examiner considered that a trade mark under examination was not inherently adapted to distinguish in respect of a certain class, and sought evidence or representations as to the trade mark applicant’s prior use of the mark – where the representations…

  • Killer Queen, LLC v Taylor [2024] FCAFC 149

    TRADE MARKS – infringement of registered trade mark established – where registered trade mark is a name – joint tortfeasance – principles discussed TRADE MARKS – specification of registered goods – meaning of “clothes” – role of the Nice Agreement Concerning the International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of…

  • 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…

Send this to a friend