Opposition by SL Beautiful Life Pty Ltd to an application under section 92 of the

This matter concerned an opposition by SL Beautiful Life Pty Ltd to an application under section 92 of the *Designs Act 2003* (Cth) for the registration of a design. The applicant sought to register a design for a "portable electronic device". The opposition was based on grounds including prior art and lack of novelty. The proceedings were heard in the Federal Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the applicant's design for a portable electronic device was new and distinct, or whether it was substantially similar to, or the same as, prior art that was publicly available before the filing date of the application. This required the Court to consider the scope of protection afforded by registered designs and the criteria for assessing novelty and distinctiveness under the *Designs Act 2003*.

In reaching its decision, the Court applied the principles of design law, which require a comparison of the overall visual impression of the registered design against the prior art. The Court considered the evidence presented by both parties, including expert evidence regarding the similarities and differences between the applicant's design and the cited prior art. The Court found that the applicant's design lacked the necessary novelty and distinctiveness, as it was substantially similar to existing designs that were publicly known.

Consequently, the Court upheld the opposition and dismissed the application for registration of the design.