Hasbro, Inc v Mogens Rud Svendsen

Hasbro, Inc. (Hasbro) sought to prevent Mogens Rud Svendsen (Svendsen) from registering the trademark "MONOPOLY" in Australia for use on board games. Hasbro, the owner of the well-known "MONOPOLY" trademark for board games, alleged that Svendsen's proposed registration would be substantially identical or deceptively similar to its existing mark, thereby infringing section 44 of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth). The dispute concerned the registrability of Svendsen's mark, not the use of the mark.

The primary legal issue before the Federal Court of Australia was whether Svendsen's proposed trademark "MONOPOLY" for board games was substantially identical or deceptively similar to Hasbro's registered "MONOPOLY" trademark for the same goods. This required the court to consider the application of section 44 of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth), which prohibits the registration of a trade mark that is substantially identical or deceptively similar to an earlier registered trade mark for goods or services in respect of which the earlier trade mark is registered.

Justice Kirov reasoned that the marks were identical and for identical goods. He applied the principles of comparison of marks, which involves considering the marks as a whole, their aural, visual, and conceptual similarities, and the goods or services in respect of which they are to be used. Given that both marks were identical ("MONOPOLY") and intended for use on board games, the court found that Svendsen's proposed mark was substantially identical to Hasbro's registered mark. Consequently, the court determined that the registration of Svendsen's mark would be prohibited under section 44 of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth).

The court ordered that the application by Mogens Rud Svendsen for registration of the trademark "MONOPOLY" be refused.