Opposition by THF Innovation Pty Ltd to application under section 92 of the Act by Caterpillar Inc to remove trade mark number 1247976 (9, 13, 18, 25) – - in the name of THF Innovation Pty Ltd.
Case
•
[2021] ATMO 80
•5 August 2021
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Opposition by THF Innovation Pty Ltd to application under section 92 of the Act by Caterpillar Inc to remove trade mark number 1247976 (9, 13, 18, 25) – - in the name of THF Innovation Pty Ltd. [2021] ATMO 80
[2021] ATMO 80
5 August 2021
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an application by Caterpillar Inc. under section 92 of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth) to remove trade mark number 1247976, registered in the name of THF Innovation Pty Ltd, from the Register. The application for removal was made in relation to classes 9, 13, 18, and 25.
The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the trade mark had been genuinely used in Australia in relation to the goods for which it was registered during the relevant period. Specifically, the Court was required to determine if there had been partial use established in relation to some of the goods within class 25, and if so, what the consequences of such partial use would be for the remainder of the goods in that class.
The Court found that partial use of the trade mark had been established during the relevant period in relation to some of the goods in class 25. Applying the principles of section 92(4)(b) of the *Trade Marks Act 1995*, the Court determined that where partial use is established, the trade mark should be removed from the Register for the remainder of the goods in that class.
As each party had achieved some success in their claims, the Court ordered that each party should bear their own costs.
The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the trade mark had been genuinely used in Australia in relation to the goods for which it was registered during the relevant period. Specifically, the Court was required to determine if there had been partial use established in relation to some of the goods within class 25, and if so, what the consequences of such partial use would be for the remainder of the goods in that class.
The Court found that partial use of the trade mark had been established during the relevant period in relation to some of the goods in class 25. Applying the principles of section 92(4)(b) of the *Trade Marks Act 1995*, the Court determined that where partial use is established, the trade mark should be removed from the Register for the remainder of the goods in that class.
As each party had achieved some success in their claims, the Court ordered that each party should bear their own costs.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Intellectual Property
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Remedies
-
Costs
-
Standing
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
5
Statutory Material Cited
0
E & J Gallo Winery v Lion Nathan Australia Pty Ltd
[2010] HCA 15
E & J Gallo Winery v Lion Nathan Australia Pty Ltd
[2010] HCA 15
Woolly Bull Enterprises Pty Ltd v Reynolds
[2001] FCA 261