Opposition by David Craig and Cathy Lin to registration of trade mark application number 1999416 (class 33) – David Traeger AUSTRALIA (stylised) - in the name of David Traeger
Case
•
[2021] ATMO 33
•29 April 2021
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Opposition by David Craig and Cathy Lin to registration of trade mark application number 1999416 (class 33) – David Traeger AUSTRALIA (stylised) - in the name of David Traeger [2021] ATMO 33
[2021] ATMO 33
29 April 2021
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an opposition by David Craig and Cathy Lin to the registration of the trade mark application number 1999416, styled "David Traeger AUSTRALIA", in Class 33, filed by David Traeger. The decision was made by Katrina Brown.
The legal issues before the court were whether the grounds of opposition pursued under sections 58, 60, and 62A of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth) had been established. Specifically, the court considered the ground of opposition alleging bad faith under section 62A.
The court reasoned that the onus of demonstrating bad faith rests squarely on the party making the allegation, requiring evidence to satisfy the civil standard of the balance of probabilities. As the Opponents had not filed any evidence, the court could not be satisfied that the trade mark application was made in bad faith, and therefore the ground under section 62A was not established. Having found no grounds of opposition were established, the court ordered that the trade mark application could proceed to registration, subject to any appeal. The court also awarded costs against the Opponent according to the official scale.
The legal issues before the court were whether the grounds of opposition pursued under sections 58, 60, and 62A of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth) had been established. Specifically, the court considered the ground of opposition alleging bad faith under section 62A.
The court reasoned that the onus of demonstrating bad faith rests squarely on the party making the allegation, requiring evidence to satisfy the civil standard of the balance of probabilities. As the Opponents had not filed any evidence, the court could not be satisfied that the trade mark application was made in bad faith, and therefore the ground under section 62A was not established. Having found no grounds of opposition were established, the court ordered that the trade mark application could proceed to registration, subject to any appeal. The court also awarded costs against the Opponent according to the official scale.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Intellectual Property
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Costs
-
Standing
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Opposition by Sandoz AG to registration of trade mark application number [2025] ATMO 152
Cases Citing This Decision
1
Cases Cited
5
Statutory Material Cited
0
Food Channel Network Pty Ltd v Television Food Network GP
[2010] FCAFC 58
Britax Child-Care Products Pty Ltd v Takata Corporation
[1999] ATMO 8