7-Eleven, Inc v *Harry Petridis & Simon Wittaker

This matter concerned an opposition by 7-Eleven, Inc. (the opponent) to a trade mark application by Harry Petridis & Simon Wittaker (the applicant). The opponent sought to prevent the registration of the applicant's trade mark, relying on grounds under sections 41, 44, and 60 of the relevant Act. The hearing officer, Ian Thompson, considered the evidence presented by both parties.

The primary legal issues before the hearing officer were whether the opponent had established grounds for opposition under sections 44 and 60 of the Act. Section 44 concerns the similarity of trade marks and goods or services, while section 60 relates to the reputation of an opponent's trade mark. The opponent also raised grounds under section 41, but these were not established.

The hearing officer found that while the opponent's trade mark "SLURPEE" had a reputation in Australia, evidenced by extensive promotion, advertising, and significant sales figures, the opponent had not established its grounds of opposition under sections 44 and 60. The evidence regarding the similarity of the trade marks and goods or services was insufficient to satisfy the requirements of section 44, and the evidence did not demonstrate that the applicant's mark was likely to deceive or cause confusion under section 60. Consequently, the application was permitted to proceed to registration. The applicant was awarded costs against the opponent.