Mad Dogg Athletics Inc v Colette McShane Pty Ltd

Mad Dogg Athletics Inc (the applicant) sought to register a trade mark, and Colette McShane Pty Ltd (the opponent) opposed this registration. The opposition was brought under sections 42(b), 44, and 60 of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth). The matter was heard by Tracey J in the Federal Court of Australia.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the opponent had established any grounds for opposing the registration of the applicant's trade mark under the specified sections of the *Trade Marks Act*. Specifically, the court had to determine if the trade mark was likely to deceive or cause confusion (s 42(b)), if it was substantially identical or deceptively similar to an earlier trade mark (s 44), or if its use would be contrary to law (s 60).

Tracey J found that the opponent had failed to establish any of the grounds for opposition. The court concluded that the applicant's trade mark did not meet the criteria for deception or confusion, nor was it substantially identical or deceptively similar to any earlier trade mark relied upon by the opponent. Furthermore, no evidence was presented to suggest that the registration or use of the trade mark would be contrary to law. Consequently, the opposition was dismissed.

The court ordered that the opposition be dismissed and that the applicant's trade mark proceed to registration.