Hugo Boss AG v Hardge

Link copied
Case Copied 24 min read

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Hugo Boss AG v Hardge [2024] FCA 1325  

File number(s): VID 373 of 2024
Judgment of: NESKOVCIN J
Date of judgment: 19 November 2024
Catchwords:  PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for default judgment pursuant to r 5.23(2)(c) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) – where substituted service orders made – where respondent in default of appearance – allegations of trade mark infringement, misleading and deceptive conduct and passing off – whether the applicant is entitled to relief – relief granted
Legislation:

Australian Consumer Law, Schedule 2 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) ss 18, 232, 29(g)-(h)

Business Names Registration Act 2011 (Cth) s 51(1)

Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 22

Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) ss 120, 126(1)(a)-(b)

Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) rr 5.22, 5.23(2), 10.24, 30.21(1)(b)(i)

Cases cited:

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Employsure Pty Ltd (2021) 392 ALR 205; [2021] FCAFC 142

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Google LLC (No 2) [2021] FCA 367

Chamberlain Group, Inc v Giant Alarm System Co, Ltd (No 2) [2019] FCA 1606

Christian v Societe Des Produits Nestle Sa [2015] FCAFC 153; (2015) 115 IPR 421

Dr Martens Australia Pty Ltd v Bata Shoe Co of Australia Pty Ltd (1997) 75 FCR 230; [1997] FCA 505

Macquarie Bank Ltd v Seagle [2008] FCA 1417

Macquarie Bank v Seagle (2005) 146 FDr MCR 400; [2005] FCA 1239

Microsoft Corporation v Short [2011] FCA 247

Self Care IP Holdings Pty Ltd v Allergan Australia Pty Ltd (2023) 277 CLR 186; [2023] HCA 8

Speedo and Vitaco Health IP Pty Ltd v AFI Cosmetic Pty Ltd (No 3) [2024] FCA 598

Speedo Holdings BV v Evans (No 2) [2011] FCA 1227

State Street Global Advisors Trust Co v Maurice Blackburn Pty Ltd (No 2) (2021) 164 IPR 420

Division: General Division
Registry: Victoria
National Practice Area: Intellectual Property
Sub-area: Trade Marks
Number of paragraphs: 46
Date of hearing: 15 October 2024
Counsel for the Applicant: Mr A Middleton
Solicitor for the Applicant: Corrs Chambers Westgarth
Counsel for the Respondent The Respondent did not appear

ORDERS

VID373 of 2024
BETWEEN:

HUGO BOSS AG

Applicant

AND:

BILLY HARDGE

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

NESKOVCIN J

DATE OF ORDER:

19 NOVEMBER 2024

THE COURT NOTES THAT:

A.In these orders:

(i)Hugo Boss Trade Marks means the trade marks set out in Schedule 1 to these orders;

(ii)Infringing Marks means the TBOSS Word Mark and the TBOSS Device Mark;

(iii)TBOSS Word Mark means the word “TBOSS”.

(iv)TBOSS Device Mark is the following device:

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.Pursuant to s 5.23 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), judgment be given against the Respondent.

2.Pursuant to s 126(1) of the Trade Marks Act1995 (Cth), the Respondent be restrained, whether by himself, his employees or agents or otherwise howsoever, from:

(a)infringing any of the Hugo Boss Trade Marks by using any of them or any name(s), word(s) mark(s), sign(s) or…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Hugo Boss AG v Hardge 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
[2024] FCA 1325
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Hugo Boss AG, an international luxury fashion brand, initiated proceedings against an Australian respondent who was accused of infringing Hugo Boss AG’s trade marks, engaging in misleading and deceptive conduct, and passing off. The Federal Court was tasked with determining whether Hugo Boss AG was entitled to relief, given that the respondent had failed to respond to the proceedings.

The central legal issues revolved around the validity of the trade mark infringement claims, the respondent's failure to respond, and the appropriate relief to be granted to the applicant. Specifically, the court had to decide if the applicant was entitled to an order for default judgment, injunctive relief, and damages or an account of profits.

The court found that the respondent's failure to respond to the proceedings justified the granting of a default judgment. The respondent had not provided any evidence to counter the applicant's claims, and had been duly served with the proceedings. The court further held that the respondent's use of the "TBOSS" mark was likely to cause confusion with the Hugo Boss Trade Marks, and that the respondent's conduct constituted trade mark infringement, misleading and deceptive conduct, and passing off. Consequently, the court granted the relief sought by the applicant, including injunctive relief, an order for damages or an account of profits, and an order for the cancellation of the respondent's domain name and business names.

The court also ordered the respondent to deliver up all infringing goods and materials, and to pay the applicant's costs of the proceeding. The decision underscored the importance of protecting trade marks and intellectual property rights, and the court's willingness to grant relief to the applicant in the absence of any defence from the respondent.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Pursuant to s 5.23 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth), judgment be given against the Respondent.

2. Pursuant to s 126(1) of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth), the Respondent be restrained, whether by himself, his employees or agents or otherwise howsoever, from:

(a) infringing any of the Hugo Boss Trade Marks by using any of them or any name(s), word(s) mark(s), sign(s) or device(s) which are substantially identical with or deceptively similar to any of the Hugo Boss Trade Marks, including but not limited to by using the TBOSS Word Mark and/or TBOSS Device Mark in the course of trade on or in relation to:

(i) any of the goods in respect of which any of the Hugo Boss Trade Marks are registered; or

(ii) goods of the same description as any of the goods in respect of which any of the Hugo Boss Trade Marks are registered,

not manufactured or provided by or under the licence or authority of the Applicant; and

(b) using either of the Infringing TBOSS Marks or any other name, word or trade mark misleadingly or deceptively similar to the Hugo Boss Trade Marks,

or otherwise procuring or inducing any other person to do any of the acts specified in this order 2.

3. Pursuant to s 232 of the Australian Consumer Law, Schedule 2 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth), the Respondent take all such steps as are necessary or desirable to cancel the domain name registration for https://tboss.com.au/.

4. Pursuant to s 51(1) of the Business Names Registration Act 2011 (Cth), the Respondent take all such steps as are necessary or desirable to cancel business name registration number 630277986 for “Tennis Boss Sportswear” and business name registration number 658764295 for “TBOSS”.

5. Pursuant to s 22 of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), the Respondent deliver up on oath to the Applicant or its duly authorised agents for destruction under supervision:

(a) all goods in the possession, power, custody or control of the Respondent, his employees or agents, bearing any of the Hugo Boss Trade Marks or any name(s), word(s), mark(s), sign(s) or device(s) which are substantially identical with or deceptively similar to any of the Hugo Boss Trade Marks, including but not limited to the Infringing TBOSS Marks, without the licence or authority of the Applicant; and

(b) all catalogues, price lists, brochures and other documents and materials, including materials which are or which are capable of being stored, generated or transmitted via any electronic media in the possession, power, custody or control of the Respondent, his employees or agents, bearing any of the Hugo Boss Trade Marks or any name(s), word(s), mark(s), sign(s) or device(s) which are substantially identical with or deceptively similar to any of the Hugo Boss Trade Marks, including but not limited to the Infringing TBOSS Marks, without the licence or authority of the Applicant.

6. Pursuant to s 126(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act, the Respondent pay to the Applicant, at the Applicant's option:

(a) damages with interest; or

(b) an account of profits,

in a sum to be assessed by the Court.

7. The Respondent pay the Applicant's costs of and incidental to this proceeding, to be taxed.

8. Liberty to apply.

Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

SCHEDULE 1

MARK

REGISTRATION NUMBER

CLASS

BOSS

345175

class: 25 clothing of all kinds, including headwear and footwear

BOSS

442954

class: 25 clothing, clothing accessories, headgear, footwear, all being goods in Class 25 and all other goods in class 25

BOSS

647108

class: 25 clothing, clothing accessories in

this class, headgear and footwear

BOSS

902472

class: 9 eyewear and parts thereof Class: 14 clocks and watches, jewellery

Class: 18 goods made of leather and leather imitations (included in this class); belts made of textile or plastic materials, suitcases and bags, umbrellas and parasols

class: 24 table linen and bed linen, woven fabrics, curtains, bathroom textiles, namely towels; handkerchiefs made of textile material

class: 25 Articles of clothing for ladies, gentlemen and children, especially suits, coats, jackets, trousers, shirts, raincoats, outer garments and underwear, socks, stockings, tricots, pullovers, knitted shirts; footwear and head coverings, ties, gloves, belts, braces, bathrobes

class: 28 gymnastic and sports equipment; balls

Class: 34 tobacco products, lighters

BOSS HUGO BOSS

442956

class: 25 Clothing, clothing accessories, headgear, footwear, all being goods in Class 25 and all other goods in Class 25

BOSS

461876

class: 42 Wholesaling and retailing of clothing, clothing accessories, footwear, glasses and parts and accessories therefor, tobacco products, cigarette papers, cigarette holders, smokers' articles, matches, gymnastic and sports articles, games, toys and playthings, leather goods, cases, bags, umbrellas, parasols, belts made of leather, articles made of or coated with precious metals and precious metal

alloys, jewellery, clocks and watches

BOSS

650119

class: 42 Wholesaling and retailing of clothing, clothing accessories, footwear, headwear, sunglasses and spectacles and parts and accessories therefor, cigarette holders, smokers' articles, gymnastic and sports articles and equipment, games, toys and playthings, leather goods, including small articles of leather, imitation leather goods, wallets, cases, key cases, handbags, trunks, travelling bags, purses, briefcases, travelling sets, bags for climbers (rucksacks), bags, umbrellas, parasols, belts, articles made of or coated with precious metals and precious metal alloys, jewellery, clocks and watches, textiles and textile goods, including cloths, curtains, blinds, household linen, table linen, bed

linen, bed covers and table covers

BOSS HUGO BOSS

889514

class: 9 Spectacles and parts thereof

class: 14 Precious metals and their alloys as well as goods made thereof or coated therewith (included in this class); jewellery, costume jewellery; clocks and watches

class: 18 Leather and leather imitations as well as goods made therefrom (included in this class); in particular, small articles of leather; trunks and suitcases; bags; umbrellas and parasols

class: 24 Woven fabrics and textile goods (included in this class), in particular, handkerchiefs and towels; bed and table linen; textile wallpapers

class: 25 Articles of clothing for ladies, gentlemen and children; socks and stockings; headgear, underwear; nightwear; swimwear; bathrobes; belts; scarves and shawls; accessories, namely head scarves, neck scarves, shoulder scarves, pocket kerchiefs; ties; gloves; footwear; belts made of leather

class: 28 Games, toys; gymnastic and sports equipment, in particular, skies, golf clubs and tennis rackets; balls; gymnastic and sports articles (included in this class)

class: 34 Tobacco and tobacco products; smokers` articles; matches

class: 35 Advertising; business administration; business management; sales consultancy

class: 42 Planning of business premises

Background

Background to the litigation

For the following reasons, I have determined that the applicant is entitled to the relief claimed and there should be orders substantially in the form sought in the applicant’s proposed minute of orders provided on 15 October 2024.BACKGROUND The following factual claims are made in the statement of claim. The applicant and other entities in its corporate group have carried on the business of marketing and selling luxury goods by reference to the names and trade marks “Boss” and “Hugo Boss” since the 1950s, and in Australia since at least 1984. The Hugo Boss Trade Marks are used on a range of products, including but not limited to clothing, footwear and headgear. In addition, the applicant has for many years sponsored prominent and widely publicised sporting events. According to the further Stern affidavit, the applicant has sponsored international tennis events including the 44th edition of the Stuttgart Open, which was known as the “Boss Open”, and it has also sponsored the tennis player Matteo Berrettini. The respondent is the owner of the business names “TBOSS” and “Tennis Boss Sportwear”, the registrant of the domain name “TBOSS.com.au” (the TBOSS Website) and the operator of a Facebook page which uses the name “TBOSS Sportswear”. The respondent has also applied for registration of the trade marks “TBOSS” and the “TBOSS” device. Without authorisation and through the TBOSS Website, from a date unknown to the applicant, the respondent has advertised, offered for sale, imported or caused to be imported, supplied and/or sold goods bearing one or more of the Hugo Boss Trade Marks or one or more trade marks which are substantially identical with or deceptively similar to one or more Hugo Boss Trade Marks. The infringing conduct relates primarily to the use of the “TBOSS” word and device marks on the TBOSS Website, as well as offers for sale of a range of clothing and headgear items bearing the “TBOSS” word and “TBOSS” device.PROCEDURAL HISTORY On 19 December 2023, the applicant’s solicitors sent a letter of demand to the respondent raising the applicant’s concerns in relation to the respondent’s conduct and notifying the respondent that, unless he ceased the infringing conduct, the applicant would commence a proceeding in this Court seeking injunctions and other relief. The letter of demand was sent to an address listed on the ‘Contact Us’ page on the TBOSS Website (the address). The respondent did not respond to the letter of demand and, on 21 January 2024, the applicant’s solicitors sent an email attaching the letter of demand to an email address listed on the TBOSS Website (the email address). The email also stated that the solicitors expected that the applicant would commence a proceeding in this Court unless a satisfactory response was provided. On 23 January 2024, the respondent sent an email, from the email address, to the applicant’s solicitors stating that he had left for the United States on 17 December 2023 and had not received the letter of demand, noting that he resided at the address. The respondent stated that he would be returning to Australia in the next few weeks and a scheduled appointment should take place at that time. This was the only correspondence received from the respondent.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

The applicant submits that the election between damages and account of profits should be made at the conclusion of the damages enquiry, consistently with the principles discussed in Dr Martens Australia Pty Ltd v Bata Shoe Co of Australia Pty Ltd (1997) 75 FCR 230; [1997] FCA 505 (Goldberg J). I am satisfied the applicant is entitled to an order for damages or an account of profits, at the applicant’s election after an enquiry has been conducted, pursuant to s 126(1)(b) of the Trade Marks Act. CONCLUSION I am satisfied that the applicant has established an entitlement to the relief claimed in relation to the contraventions alleged in the statement of claim, for the foregoing reasons. The applicant may apply for further orders in relation to any inquiry by the Court regarding an assessment of damages or account of profit.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.