FALKE KGaA v Lily O'Reilly

FALKE KGaA (the opponent) opposed the registration of a trade mark sought by Lily O'Reilly (the applicant) under section 52 of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth). The opposition was based on grounds including sections 42(b), 44, and 60 of the Act. The matter came before Jonathon Galloway.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the applicant's trade mark should be refused registration on the grounds that it was substantially identical or deceptively similar to an earlier trade mark (section 44), or whether it was likely to deceive or cause confusion (section 42(b)), or whether it was an invented word or words used in relation to goods of the same description as those for which the opponent's trade mark was registered (section 60).

The court found that the ground of opposition under section 44 was established, as the applicant's trade mark was found to be deceptively similar to the opponent's earlier registered trade mark. No exceptions to section 44 were found to apply. Consequently, the court determined that the applicant's trade mark should be refused registration.