Opposition by CELINE to registration of trade mark application 2115313 (25) – CV CELINE VICTORIA (Figurative) – in the name of Celine Victoria Robinson
Case
•
[2022] ATMO 5
•11 January 2022
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Opposition by CELINE to registration of trade mark application 2115313 (25) – CV CELINE VICTORIA (Figurative) – in the name of Celine Victoria Robinson [2022] ATMO 5
[2022] ATMO 5
11 January 2022
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an opposition by CELINE to the registration of trade mark application number 2115313, for the figurative mark CV CELINE VICTORIA, filed by Celine Victoria Robinson. The opposition was heard by Nicholas Smith, a delegate of the Registrar of Trade Marks.
The legal issues before the delegate were whether the grounds of opposition raised by CELINE under sections 42(b), 44, 60, and 62A of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth) had been established. The onus of proof rested on the Opponent, CELINE, to demonstrate, on the balance of probabilities, that at least one of these grounds was made out, with the relevant date for determination being the filing date of the application, 27 August 2020.
The delegate found that CELINE had failed to discharge the onus of proof for any of the nominated grounds. Specifically, for grounds under sections 42(b), 60, and 62A, which were particularised by reference to the Opponent's use or reputation in its own trade marks, no evidence was filed by CELINE. Consequently, these grounds could not be established. The delegate also considered and found that the ground of opposition under section 44 had not been established.
As CELINE had failed to establish any of the grounds of opposition, the delegate ordered that trade mark application number 2115313 may proceed to registration, subject to a one-month waiting period from the date of the decision, unless an appeal was filed. The delegate also awarded costs against the Opponent in favour of the Applicant, Celine Victoria Robinson, in accordance with the general rule that costs follow the event.
The legal issues before the delegate were whether the grounds of opposition raised by CELINE under sections 42(b), 44, 60, and 62A of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth) had been established. The onus of proof rested on the Opponent, CELINE, to demonstrate, on the balance of probabilities, that at least one of these grounds was made out, with the relevant date for determination being the filing date of the application, 27 August 2020.
The delegate found that CELINE had failed to discharge the onus of proof for any of the nominated grounds. Specifically, for grounds under sections 42(b), 60, and 62A, which were particularised by reference to the Opponent's use or reputation in its own trade marks, no evidence was filed by CELINE. Consequently, these grounds could not be established. The delegate also considered and found that the ground of opposition under section 44 had not been established.
As CELINE had failed to establish any of the grounds of opposition, the delegate ordered that trade mark application number 2115313 may proceed to registration, subject to a one-month waiting period from the date of the decision, unless an appeal was filed. The delegate also awarded costs against the Opponent in favour of the Applicant, Celine Victoria Robinson, in accordance with the general rule that costs follow the event.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Intellectual Property
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Standing
-
Costs
-
Appeal
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
13
Statutory Material Cited
0
Food Channel Network Pty Ltd v Television Food Network GP
[2010] FCAFC 58
Food Channel Network Pty Ltd v Television Food Network GP
[2010] FCAFC 58
Registrar of Trade Marks v Woolworths
[1999] FCA 1020