Campomar Sociedad, & Anor v Nike International

Campomar Sociedad, Controladora, S.A. and another (the appellants) brought proceedings against Nike International Ltd (the respondent) in the Federal Court of Australia, alleging that the respondent had engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct in contravention of s 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth). The dispute concerned the use of the word "Nike" in relation to sporting goods and apparel, with the appellants claiming that the respondent's activities had damaged their reputation and goodwill in relation to their own "Nike" branded products.

The primary legal issue before the High Court of Australia was whether the respondent's conduct in marketing and selling its goods in Australia, despite not having registered its trade mark in Australia, constituted misleading or deceptive conduct under s 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth). This involved considering whether the respondent's use of the "Nike" name, in circumstances where the appellants had established a significant presence and reputation in the Australian market under the same name, was likely to deceive or confuse consumers as to the origin or sponsorship of the goods.

Gaudron and McHugh JJ held that the respondent's conduct was not misleading or deceptive. Their Honours reasoned that s 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) does not confer a right to a trade mark, nor does it protect against the mere use of a name that is the same as or similar to another's trade mark. Instead, the section prohibits conduct that is misleading or deceptive. In this instance, the court found that the respondent's marketing and sales activities, while occurring in Australia, did not create a likelihood of deception or confusion among Australian consumers regarding the origin of the goods. The appellants' claim was therefore dismissed.