GSLT Holdings Limited v Palace Arcade No. 2 Pty Ltd

GSLT Holdings Limited opposed the registration of the trade mark application number 2309393, "PALACE ARCADE", by The Palace Arcade No 2 Pty Ltd. The application sought registration across multiple classes, including 16 (paper goods and stationery), 25 (clothing), 28 (games and playthings), 39 (transportation and storage), 41 (education and entertainment services), and 43 (food and accommodation services). The opposition was heard by Anne Makrigiorgos.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicant's trade mark "PALACE ARCADE" was deceptively similar to GSLT Holdings Limited's registered trade mark "PALACE" for the purposes of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth). This involved an assessment of the visual, aural, and conceptual similarities between the two marks, as well as consideration of the respective goods and services for which the marks were used or intended to be used.

The court determined that there was a significant degree of visual and conceptual similarity between the marks. It reasoned that the word "PALACE" formed the dominant and distinctive element of the applicant's mark, and that the addition of "ARCADE" did not sufficiently differentiate it from GSLT Holdings Limited's registered mark. Given this similarity, and considering the overlapping nature of some of the goods and services, the court found that there was a real likelihood of deception or confusion among consumers. Consequently, the opposition was upheld.