Instagram LLC v Instagoods Pty Ltd
Case
•
[2021] ATMO 53
•16 June 2021
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Opposition by Instagram, LLC to registration of trade mark application 1955633 (classes 9 and 35) – INSTADATE – in the name of Instagoods Pty Ltd. [[2021]] ATMO 53
[2021] ATMO 53
16 June 2021
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In this matter before the Registrar of Trade Marks, Instagram LLC (the Opponent) opposed the registration of a trade mark application by Instagoods Pty Ltd (the Applicant). The dispute concerned the registrability of the Applicant's proposed trade mark.
The primary legal issue before the Registrar was whether the Applicant's trade mark should be refused registration under section 60 of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth), which requires the Registrar to consider whether the registration is likely to cause confusion due to the reputation of an opponent's existing trade mark. The Registrar also considered an abandoned ground of opposition under section 59 of the Act and the appropriate costs order.
The Registrar reasoned that the Opponent had established a ground of opposition under section 60 of the Act, finding that confusion was likely due to the reputation of the Opponent's trade mark. Consequently, the Registrar refused to register the Applicant's trade mark. Regarding costs, the Registrar declined to award costs to the Applicant in relation to the abandoned section 59 ground, noting that its inclusion was permitted as it related to information the Opponent could not have reasonably known at the time of filing. Applying the general rule that costs follow the event, the Registrar awarded costs against the Applicant in favour of the Opponent.
The primary legal issue before the Registrar was whether the Applicant's trade mark should be refused registration under section 60 of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth), which requires the Registrar to consider whether the registration is likely to cause confusion due to the reputation of an opponent's existing trade mark. The Registrar also considered an abandoned ground of opposition under section 59 of the Act and the appropriate costs order.
The Registrar reasoned that the Opponent had established a ground of opposition under section 60 of the Act, finding that confusion was likely due to the reputation of the Opponent's trade mark. Consequently, the Registrar refused to register the Applicant's trade mark. Regarding costs, the Registrar declined to award costs to the Applicant in relation to the abandoned section 59 ground, noting that its inclusion was permitted as it related to information the Opponent could not have reasonably known at the time of filing. Applying the general rule that costs follow the event, the Registrar awarded costs against the Applicant in favour of the Opponent.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Commercial Law
-
Intellectual Property
Legal Concepts
-
Costs
-
Injunction
-
Remedies
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
National Cancer Foundation v Registrar of Trade Marks [2025] FCA 711
Cases Cited
5
Statutory Material Cited
0
McCormick & Company Inc v McCormick
[2000] FCA 1335
Le Cordon Bleu BV v Cordon Bleu International Ltee
[2000] FCA 1587
Pottle Productions Inc v Rute Ithalat Ve Ihracat Anonim Sirketi
[2012] ATMO 124