Healthkit Pty Ltd v Apple Inc

Link copied
Case Copied 65 min read

TRADE MARKS ACT 1995



DECISION OF A DELEGATE OF THE REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS WITH REASONS

Re:Opposition by Apple Inc to registration of trade mark application 1626348 (9, 35, 36, 41, 42, 44, 45) - HealthKit - in the name of Healthkit Pty Ltd.

and

Opposition by Healthkit Pty Ltd to registration of trade mark application 1637556 (9, 14) HEALTHKIT - in the name of Apple Inc.

Delegate: Iain Campbell Thompson
Representation: Apple: Angus Lang of Counsel, instructed by Robert Arnold of Baker & McKenzie.
Healthkit: Tom Cordiner of Counsel, instructed by Hugh McLaren of Meerkin & Apel, Lawyers.
Decision: 2017 ATMO 98
Trade Marks Act 1995
Section 52 oppositions to registration
1626348: grounds under sections 44 and 58 – ground under section 44 established in relation to goods and services in Classes 9 and 42, no evidence of use of Trade Mark by Healthkit so subsections 44(3) and 44(4) cannot apply; section 58 not established.
1637556: grounds under sections 58, 59, 60 and 42 – section 58 Healthkit has not established use of Trade Mark before priority date; of Apple Application; section 59 – evidence insufficient to transfer onus onto Apple; section 60 and 42 grounds not established.

Background

1. These opposition proceedings under section 52 of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (‘the Act’) arise from the filing of two applications for registrations of trade marks.  Healthkit Pty Ltd (‘Healthkit’) has filed the following application:

Application No:         1626348
Priority Date:             3 June 2014

Goods/Services:         Class 9: Computer software and software applications providing practice and patient management and administration services for medical practitioners; computer software and software applications to enable the transmission, sharing, organisation and management of medical and clinical information; computer software and software applications for accesing [sic] and searching online medical practitioner databases

Class 35: Business management and administration services supporting utilisation of a global computer network; Business recruitment consultancy; Business referrals services; Commercial information services provided by access to a computer database; Compilation and provision of online directories; Compilation of information into computer databases; Compilation of lists of prospective customers; Computerised compilation of customer indexes; Computerised database management; Database management; Employment recruitment; Lobbying (promoting, publicising or otherwise representing the interests or concerns of others); Maintaining data in databases; Online advertising on a computer network; Online data processing services; Online promotion on a computer network; Organisation and administration services in relation to the supply of benefits for customer loyalty and frequent buyer or frequent flyer schemes; Organisation and management of customer loyalty programmes; Organisation, operation and supervision of customer loyalty schemes; Personnel recruitment; Providing information, including online, about advertising, business management and administration and office functions; Sales promotion through customer loyalty programmes (for others); The bringing together, for the benefit of others, a variety of goods (excluding the transport thereof), enabling customers to conveniently view and purchase the goods; Service to assist in establishing a network of business contacts; Systemization of information into computer databases; Updating data in databases
Class 36:…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Healthkit Pty Ltd v Apple Inc and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2017] ATMO 98
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This decision concerns an application by Healthkit Pty Ltd for registration of two trade marks, application numbers 1626348 and 1637556, opposed by Apple Inc. The matter came before the Registrar of Trade Marks, who was required to decide whether to register the trade marks, having regard to the grounds of opposition.

The Registrar was required to determine whether the grounds of opposition raised by Apple Inc. had been established in relation to Healthkit's trade mark applications. Specifically, the Registrar had to decide whether to refuse or register the trade marks, with or without conditions or limitations, based on the established grounds of opposition.

The Registrar reasoned that Apple Inc. had successfully established its opposition in relation to goods in Class 9 and services in Class 42 for application number 1626348. Despite being offered the opportunity to amend its specification by deleting these classes, Healthkit declined to do so. Consequently, the Registrar refused to register application number 1626348. For application number 1637556, the Registrar found that Healthkit had not established any grounds of opposition, allowing the application to proceed to registration, subject to any appeal. The Registrar awarded costs to Apple Inc. in both matters, to be paid by Healthkit.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Section 55(1) of the Act relevantly provides:55Decision(1)Unless subsection (3) applies to the proceedings, the Registrar must, at the end, decide:(a)to refuse to register the trade mark; or(b)to register the trade mark (with or without conditions or limitations) in respect of the goods and/or services then specified in the application;having regard to the extent (if any) to which any ground on which the application was opposed has been established.Note:For limitations see section 6. Apple has established its opposition in relation to the goods in Class 9 and services in Class 42 and it is accordingly appropriate to refuse to register 1626348. In line with recently adopted office practice, I have allowed Healthkit the opportunity to delete the Class 9 and Class 42 claims from its specification; however, Healthkit has declined to do so. Accordingly, I refuse to register application 1626348. Healthkit has not established a ground of opposition to the registration of 1637556. The trade mark application may then proceed to registration one month from the date of this decision. If the Registrar has been served with a notice of appeal before that time, I direct that registration shall not occur until the appeal has been decided or discontinued and the disposition of this application should be in accordance with the Court’s order or direction. Both parties requested their costs in these matters. As Apple has been the successful party, I award costs in both matters against Healthkit at the official scale set out in Schedule 8 to the Trade Mark Regulations 1995.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.