Opposition by Stoddart Technology Pty Ltd to registration of trade mark application 2047024 (37) – S (Device) – in the name of Stoddart Electrical Pty Ltd
Case
•
[2021] ATMO 138
•16 November 2021
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Opposition by Stoddart Technology Pty Ltd to registration of trade mark application 2047024 (37) – S (Device) – in the name of Stoddart Electrical Pty Ltd [2021] ATMO 138
[2021] ATMO 138
16 November 2021
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an opposition by Stoddart Technology Pty Ltd (the Opponent) to the registration of trade mark application number 2047024, a device mark incorporating the letter "S", in the name of Stoddart Electrical Pty Ltd (the Applicant). The opposition was heard by Nicholas Smith, a delegate of the Registrar of Trade Marks.
The Opponent sought to oppose the registration of the trade mark on grounds arising under sections 42(b), 44, and 60 of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth). The legal issues before the delegate were whether the Opponent had successfully established any of these grounds of opposition, considering the evidence filed by both parties and the Applicant's request for a decision without a hearing.
The delegate considered the evidence filed by both parties, noting that the Opponent bore the onus of establishing its grounds of opposition. The delegate adopted the approach from *Source Homeloans Pty Ltd v Coles Group Ltd* regarding claims of confidentiality in evidence, stating that commercially sensitive matters would not be discussed in detail unless necessary and that parties must specifically identify sensitive information. Ultimately, the delegate was not satisfied that the use of the trade mark by the Applicant would be contrary to law, and therefore found that the ground under section 42(b) was not established. As no grounds were established, the delegate ordered that the trade mark application could proceed to registration, subject to any appeal. The Applicant was awarded costs against the Opponent.
The Opponent sought to oppose the registration of the trade mark on grounds arising under sections 42(b), 44, and 60 of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth). The legal issues before the delegate were whether the Opponent had successfully established any of these grounds of opposition, considering the evidence filed by both parties and the Applicant's request for a decision without a hearing.
The delegate considered the evidence filed by both parties, noting that the Opponent bore the onus of establishing its grounds of opposition. The delegate adopted the approach from *Source Homeloans Pty Ltd v Coles Group Ltd* regarding claims of confidentiality in evidence, stating that commercially sensitive matters would not be discussed in detail unless necessary and that parties must specifically identify sensitive information. Ultimately, the delegate was not satisfied that the use of the trade mark by the Applicant would be contrary to law, and therefore found that the ground under section 42(b) was not established. As no grounds were established, the delegate ordered that the trade mark application could proceed to registration, subject to any appeal. The Applicant was awarded costs against the Opponent.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Intellectual Property
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Standing
-
Costs
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
24
Statutory Material Cited
0
Source Homeloans Pty Ltd v Coles Group Ltd
[2008] ATMO 17
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