Monster Energy Company v Cheng Shin Rubber Ind. Co., Ltd

Monster Energy Company opposed the registration of three trade mark applications by Cheng Shin Rubber Ind. Co., Ltd. The applications concerned trade mark application number 2064464 in class 12 (vehicles and parts thereof), trade mark application number 2064465 in class 25 (clothing, footwear, headgear), and trade mark application number 2108252 in class 35 (retail services). The oppositions were heard by Timothy Brown.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the proposed trade marks were substantially identical or deceptively similar to Monster Energy Company's registered trade marks, specifically its well-known "MONSTER" and "MONSTER ENERGY" marks. This involved an assessment of the visual, aural, and conceptual similarities between the marks, as well as consideration of the respective goods and services for which registration was sought.

Timothy Brown applied the principles established in cases such as *Shell Co of Australia Ltd v Esso Standard Oil (Australia) Ltd* and *Parkdale Custom Built Furniture Pty Ltd v Puxu Pty Ltd*. The assessment of deceptive similarity required a consideration of the overall impression of the marks, taking into account any differences. The court found that the proposed marks, which featured the word "CHENG SHIN" in a distinctive font and colour scheme, were not substantially identical or deceptively similar to Monster Energy Company's registered marks. This conclusion was based on the distinctiveness of the word "CHENG SHIN" and the lack of visual, aural, or conceptual overlap with the "MONSTER" marks, particularly when considering the goods and services.

The oppositions were dismissed.