New Zealand Winegrowers v Lacheteau S.a.s [Sec=Unclassified]
Case
•
[2009] ATMO 82
•22 October 2009
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
New Zealand Winegrowers v Lacheteau S.a.s [Sec=Unclassified] [2009] ATMO 82
[2009] ATMO 82
22 October 2009
CaseChat Overview and Summary
New Zealand Winegrowers sought to register the trade mark KIWI CUVEE. Lacheteau S.a.s opposed this application. The hearing officer, Terry Williams, considered the opposition.
The primary legal issue before the hearing officer was whether the proposed registration of the trade mark KIWI CUVEE was likely to deceive or cause confusion, pursuant to section 43 of the relevant Act. This involved determining if the trade mark, by reason of any connotation it possessed, would lead to confusion in the marketplace regarding the origin or nature of the goods.
The hearing officer reasoned that a distinction could be drawn between consumers actively engaged in selecting wine, such as those discussing a wine list or requesting a specific wine, and those passively browsing in a retail environment. He found that the use of the trade mark KIWI CUVEE carried a real and significant risk of confusion, particularly in the context of aural use or written display on wine lists in restaurants and bars. This confusion was attributed to a specific connotation of the trade mark, and the hearing officer concluded that the label itself would not sufficiently mitigate this risk. Consequently, the ground of opposition under section 43 was established.
The hearing officer refused to register the trade mark KIWI CUVEE. The applicant was directed to pay the costs of the opponent.
The primary legal issue before the hearing officer was whether the proposed registration of the trade mark KIWI CUVEE was likely to deceive or cause confusion, pursuant to section 43 of the relevant Act. This involved determining if the trade mark, by reason of any connotation it possessed, would lead to confusion in the marketplace regarding the origin or nature of the goods.
The hearing officer reasoned that a distinction could be drawn between consumers actively engaged in selecting wine, such as those discussing a wine list or requesting a specific wine, and those passively browsing in a retail environment. He found that the use of the trade mark KIWI CUVEE carried a real and significant risk of confusion, particularly in the context of aural use or written display on wine lists in restaurants and bars. This confusion was attributed to a specific connotation of the trade mark, and the hearing officer concluded that the label itself would not sufficiently mitigate this risk. Consequently, the ground of opposition under section 43 was established.
The hearing officer refused to register the trade mark KIWI CUVEE. The applicant was directed to pay the costs of the opponent.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Intellectual Property
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Statutory Construction
-
Remedies
-
Costs
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
11
Statutory Material Cited
0
Pfizer Products Inc v Karam
[2006] FCA 1663
Chocolaterie Guylian N.V. v Registrar of Trade Marks
[2009] FCA 891
Food Channel Network Pty Ltd v Television Food Network GP
[2010] FCAFC 58