Intellectual Property Development Corporation Pty Ltd. v Reynolds Consumer Products, Inc

This matter concerned an application for the removal of a trade mark from the Register, brought by Reynolds Consumer Products, Inc. (the Removal Applicant) against Intellectual Property Development Corporation Pty Ltd. (the Removal Opponent). The dispute arose from the Removal Applicant's assertion that the registered trade mark had not been used in Australia for a continuous period of three years. The hearing was conducted by Debrett G. Lyons, acting as a delegate of the Registrar of Trade Marks.

The primary legal issue before the delegate was whether the grounds for removal under subsection 92(4)(b) of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth) had been established. This subsection requires proof that a trade mark has remained registered for a continuous period of three years ending one month before the filing of the removal application, and that during that period, the registered owner neither used the trade mark in Australia nor used it in good faith in Australia in relation to the relevant goods and/or services.

The delegate found that the Removal Applicant had demonstrated a genuine commercial interest in the removal of the trade mark, noting that the Removal Applicant had its own trade mark applications blocked by the registration in question. Crucially, the delegate determined that the evidence presented established the grounds for removal under section 92(4)(b) of the Act. The delegate also considered the discretionary factors outlined in *Paragon Shoes Pty Ltd v Paragini Distributors (NSW) Pty Ltd*, finding no compelling reasons to exercise discretion against removal.

Consequently, the delegate directed that the registration be removed from the Register in respect of all goods to which it related, effective one month from the date of the decision, unless an appeal was filed. The Removal Applicant was also awarded its costs.