Opposition by Eveden Inc. to registration of trade mark application no. 1840938 (class 25) – CANDY SHOP GODDESSES - in the name of CSM HOLDINGS AUSTRALIA PTY LTD

This matter concerned an opposition by Eveden Inc. to the registration of trade mark application no. 1840938, for the mark CANDY SHOP GODDESSES in class 25, filed by CSM HOLDINGS AUSTRALIA PTY LTD. The opposition was heard by Bianca Irgang, a Hearing Officer.

The primary legal issue before the Hearing Officer was whether the applicant's trade mark application should be refused registration on the grounds of opposition, specifically under section 44 of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth). This ground requires the opponent to demonstrate that the applicant's trade mark is substantially identical or deceptively similar to an earlier registered trade mark owned by the opponent, in respect of similar goods or services. The opponent also relied on grounds under sections 60 and 42(b), but these were not the focus of the decision.

The Hearing Officer found that the opponent had established the ground of opposition under section 44. The opponent relied on two earlier registered trade marks, GODDESS (registration no. 151572) and SEA GODDESS (registration no. 1331639), both in class 25. The Hearing Officer determined that both of the opponent's trade marks had earlier priority dates than the applicant's trade mark and that the goods covered by the registrations were the same as the applicant's goods. Crucially, the Hearing Officer found the applicant's trade mark CANDY SHOP GODDESSES to be deceptively similar to the opponent's GODDESS trade mark. Applying the principles of deceptive similarity, and referencing a previous decision involving the GODDESS mark, the Hearing Officer concluded that there was a real tangible danger that the ordinary person would be caused to wonder whether the products came from the same source. The applicant had not filed evidence or submissions to overcome this ground.

Accordingly, the Hearing Officer refused to register trade mark application no. 1840938. Costs were awarded against the applicant in favour of the opponent.