FremantleMedia Limited and 19 TV Limited v Michael Lohmann

FremantleMedia Limited and 19 TV Limited (the applicants) sought to register trade marks. Michael Lohmann (the opponent) opposed these applications, relying on three of his registered trade marks. The dispute concerned whether the applicants' proposed trade marks were deceptively similar to the opponent's registered trade marks, and whether the goods and services for which the opponent's trade marks were registered had a sufficient nexus to the services for which the applicants sought registration. The matter was heard by Alison Windsor.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicants' trade mark applications should be refused under section 44 of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth) on the grounds of deceptive similarity to the opponent's earlier registered trade marks. This required the court to consider the scope of the services for which the opponent's trade marks were registered and to determine if there was a sufficient connection between those services and the services sought by the applicants.

The court found that one of the opponent's trade marks, registered for goods in Class 3, had no nexus of similarity with the services the applicants claimed, and therefore this registration was not relevant to the opposition. Regarding the remaining two registrations, which were for services in Class 38 and Class 41, the court was satisfied that the services were sufficiently similar to those sought by the applicants. The court applied the principles of deceptive similarity, considering the visual and aural resemblance of the marks, as well as the conceptual relationship between the goods and services. The court concluded that the applicants' marks were likely to cause confusion among consumers given the overlap in the services offered.