Just Cuts Franchising Pty Limited

This matter concerned a trade mark application by Just Cuts Franchising Pty Limited for the mark "STYLECUTS" in colour, filed in classes 41 (education and training services) and 44 (hairdressing services). The application was opposed by a third party. The hearing officer, Tracey Berger, was tasked with determining whether the trade mark should be registered.

The primary legal issue before the hearing officer was whether the trade mark "STYLECUTS" was inherently deceptive or misleading, or otherwise disentitled to registration under the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth). Specifically, the hearing officer had to consider if the mark was descriptive of the services offered, and if so, whether it had acquired distinctiveness through use.

In her reasoning, the hearing officer applied the principles of trade mark law, considering the ordinary meaning of the words "style" and "cuts" in relation to hairdressing services. She found that the mark was indeed descriptive of the services provided by a hair salon, namely the styling and cutting of hair. As the mark was found to be descriptive, the onus shifted to the applicant to demonstrate that it had acquired distinctiveness through extensive use in the marketplace, such that consumers would recognise it as a trade mark indicating the origin of the services, rather than merely describing the services themselves.

The hearing officer concluded that Just Cuts Franchising Pty Limited had not sufficiently demonstrated that the mark "STYLECUTS" had acquired distinctiveness in relation to the services in classes 41 and 44. Accordingly, the trade mark application was refused.