Mary McCormick v McCormick & Company Incorporated

Mary McCormick (the applicant) brought proceedings against McCormick & Company Incorporated (the respondent) in the Federal Court of Australia. The dispute concerned the respondent's alleged contravention of section 18 of the Australian Consumer Law (ACL), which prohibits misleading or deceptive conduct. The applicant sought an injunction and damages.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the respondent's conduct in marketing and selling its products, specifically its "McCormick" branded herbs and spices, amounted to misleading or deceptive conduct under section 18 of the ACL. This involved determining whether consumers were likely to be misled into believing that the products were manufactured or owned by the applicant, or by a company with which she was associated, when in fact they were not.

Justice Vija Zars considered the evidence presented by both parties, including expert testimony and consumer surveys. The court applied the established legal principles for assessing misleading or deceptive conduct, which require an objective assessment of whether a significant number of ordinary or reasonable consumers would be likely to be misled. The court found that the respondent's use of the "McCormick" name, while potentially causing some confusion, did not, in the circumstances, create a likelihood of deception that the products were associated with the applicant. The court noted that the respondent had used the name for a considerable period and that the products were clearly labelled as being manufactured by McCormick & Company Incorporated.

The court therefore dismissed the applicant's claim for contravention of section 18 of the ACL.