Himalaya Global Holdings Ltd

This decision concerns an application to register a trade mark, brought by Himalaya Global Holdings Ltd. The application was heard by Iain Thompson, a Hearing Officer in the Trade Marks Hearings, on 7 February 2012. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the applicant had provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that its proposed trade mark had acquired distinctiveness in the marketplace.

The primary legal issue before the Hearing Officer was whether the applicant had satisfied the requirements of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth) for the registration of its mark. Specifically, the Hearing Officer had to determine if the applicant had adduced sufficient evidence to establish acquired distinctiveness, a key ground for registration, particularly where a mark might otherwise be considered non-distinctive. This determination was crucial in deciding whether the Registrar was obliged to accept or reject the application under section 33 of the Act.

The Hearing Officer's reasoning focused on the absence of evidence presented by the applicant. Section 33(1) of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth) mandates that the Registrar must accept an application unless satisfied that it has not been made in accordance with the Act or that there are grounds for rejection. In this instance, the Hearing Officer concluded that the applicant had failed to adduce any evidence demonstrating acquired distinctiveness. Consequently, the Hearing Officer was not satisfied that the application met the necessary criteria for registration.

Based on the lack of evidence of acquired distinctiveness, the Hearing Officer rejected application number 1362590.