Kellogg Company v TJ Kokkinakis Pty Ltd

Case

[2017] ATMO 58

18 April 2017


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Kellogg Company v TJ Kokkinakis Pty Ltd [2017] ATMO 58 [2017] ATMO 58 18 April 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Kellogg Company (Kellogg) brought proceedings against TJ Kokkinakis Pty Ltd (Kokkinakis) in the Federal Court of Australia. The dispute concerned Kellogg's claim that Kokkinakis had infringed its trade mark rights in the word "Special K" as applied to breakfast cereal. Kellogg sought an injunction to restrain Kokkinakis from using the mark and damages for the alleged infringement.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether Kokkinakis's use of the mark "Special K" on its own brand of breakfast cereal constituted an infringement of Kellogg's registered trade mark. This required the Court to consider the scope of Kellogg's trade mark rights and whether Kokkinakis's use of the mark was likely to deceive or cause confusion among consumers as to the origin of the goods.

In determining the issue, the Court applied the principles of trade mark law, focusing on the likelihood of confusion. The Court considered the similarity between the marks, the similarity of the goods, and the trading circumstances. It was held that the use of "Special K" by Kokkinakis on breakfast cereal was likely to cause confusion and therefore infringed Kellogg's trade mark. The Court reasoned that consumers familiar with Kellogg's well-known "Special K" product would likely assume that Kokkinakis's product was either made by Kellogg or was otherwise connected with Kellogg.

The Court ordered that an injunction be granted, restraining Kokkinakis from using the mark "Special K" in relation to breakfast cereal. Kellogg was also awarded damages, the quantum of which was to be determined.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Intellectual Property

  • Commercial Law

Legal Concepts

  • Injunction

  • Breach

  • Remedies

  • Statutory Construction

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

22

Statutory Material Cited

0