Opposition by Find Marketing Pty Ltd to application under section 92 of the Act by Find Financial Planners Pty Ltd to remove trade mark registration number 1770718 (36) Find & Device (Series) - in the name of Find...
Case
•
[2019] ATMO 82
•30 May 2019
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Opposition by Find Marketing Pty Ltd to application under section 92 of the Act by Find Financial Planners Pty Ltd to remove trade mark registration number 1770718 (36) Find & Device (Series) - in the name of Find... [2019] ATMO 82
[2019] ATMO 82
30 May 2019
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an opposition by Find Marketing Pty Ltd to an application by Find Financial Planners Pty Ltd to remove trade mark registration number 1770718, a "Find & Device (Series)" mark registered in class 36, from the Register. The opposition was heard by M. Cooper.
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the registered trade mark had been genuinely used in Australia in relation to the services for which it was registered, or whether there was a lack of genuine use. This required an assessment of the nature and extent of the use of the trade mark by the registered proprietor.
The court considered the evidence presented by both parties regarding the use of the trade mark. It applied the principles established in trade mark law concerning genuine use, which requires more than token or sporadic use and involves use that is real and substantial in the ordinary course of trade. The court analysed the evidence of advertising, promotional activities, and actual transactions to determine if the use met this threshold.
The court found that the registered proprietor had failed to demonstrate genuine use of the trade mark in relation to the registered services. Accordingly, the court ordered the removal of the trade mark registration number 1770718 from the Register.
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the registered trade mark had been genuinely used in Australia in relation to the services for which it was registered, or whether there was a lack of genuine use. This required an assessment of the nature and extent of the use of the trade mark by the registered proprietor.
The court considered the evidence presented by both parties regarding the use of the trade mark. It applied the principles established in trade mark law concerning genuine use, which requires more than token or sporadic use and involves use that is real and substantial in the ordinary course of trade. The court analysed the evidence of advertising, promotional activities, and actual transactions to determine if the use met this threshold.
The court found that the registered proprietor had failed to demonstrate genuine use of the trade mark in relation to the registered services. Accordingly, the court ordered the removal of the trade mark registration number 1770718 from the Register.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Intellectual Property
-
Commercial Law
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Standing
-
Remedies
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Judicial Review
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
19
Statutory Material Cited
0
Pfizer Products Inc v Karam
[2006] FCA 1663
Food Channel Network Pty Ltd v Television Food Network GP
[2010] FCAFC 58
Registrar of Trade Marks v Woolworths
[1999] FCA 1020