Neat Feat Products Ltd v Neet Feet Pty Ltd

Neat Feat Products Ltd (the applicant) sought an interlocutory injunction against Neet Feet Pty Ltd (the respondent) to restrain the use of the name "Neet Feet" in connection with the sale of foot care products. The applicant, a New Zealand company, alleged that the respondent's use of the name infringed its registered trade mark "Neat Feat" and constituted passing off. The matter came before McDonagh J in the Federal Court of Australia.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the applicant had established a serious question to be tried regarding trade mark infringement and passing off, and whether the balance of convenience favoured granting an interlocutory injunction. Specifically, the court had to consider the likelihood of confusion between the two marks, given their phonetic and visual similarities, and the nature of the goods sold under each mark.

McDonagh J found that there was a serious question to be tried concerning both trade mark infringement and passing off. His Honour noted the close phonetic resemblance between "Neat Feat" and "Neet Feet" and the similar field of goods, concluding that there was a real likelihood of consumers being deceived or confused. The balance of convenience favoured the applicant, as the potential damage to its reputation and goodwill if the injunction were not granted outweighed the potential prejudice to the respondent from being restrained from using the name during the litigation.

Consequently, McDonagh J granted the interlocutory injunction, restraining the respondent from using the name "Neet Feet" or any other name likely to cause confusion with the applicant's trade mark, pending the final determination of the proceedings.