Oppositions by Alexandros Christou to registration of trade mark applications 1934814 Orchid Excellence (class 1) and 1956221 Orchid Excellence Fertiliser (class 1) both in the name of Withiell Investments Pty Ltd
Case
•
[2021] ATMO 10
•4 February 2021
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Oppositions by Alexandros Christou to registration of trade mark applications 1934814 Orchid Excellence (class 1) and 1956221 Orchid Excellence Fertiliser (class 1) both in the name of Withiell Investments Pty Ltd [2021] ATMO 10
[2021] ATMO 10
4 February 2021
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Alexandros Christou opposed the registration of two trade mark applications, 1934814 for "Orchid Excellence" in Class 1 and 1956221 for "Orchid Excellence Fertiliser" in Class 1, both filed by Withiell Investments Pty Ltd. The opposition was heard by Adrian Richards, acting as delegate for the Registrar of Trade Marks.
The sole ground of opposition raised by Mr. Christou was that the trade mark applications were made in bad faith, pursuant to section 62A of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth). The delegate was therefore required to determine whether Withiell Investments Pty Ltd had acted in bad faith in filing these applications for registration.
In reaching his decision, the delegate considered the evidence presented by both parties. The delegate found that the onus was on Mr. Christou to establish that the applications were made in bad faith. After reviewing the evidence, the delegate concluded that Mr. Christou had not discharged this onus. There was insufficient evidence to demonstrate that Withiell Investments Pty Ltd had acted with any intention to deceive or mislead, or with any other dishonest intention, at the time the applications were filed. Consequently, the ground of opposition was not established.
The delegate ordered that both oppositions be dismissed and that the trade mark applications proceed to registration.
The sole ground of opposition raised by Mr. Christou was that the trade mark applications were made in bad faith, pursuant to section 62A of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth). The delegate was therefore required to determine whether Withiell Investments Pty Ltd had acted in bad faith in filing these applications for registration.
In reaching his decision, the delegate considered the evidence presented by both parties. The delegate found that the onus was on Mr. Christou to establish that the applications were made in bad faith. After reviewing the evidence, the delegate concluded that Mr. Christou had not discharged this onus. There was insufficient evidence to demonstrate that Withiell Investments Pty Ltd had acted with any intention to deceive or mislead, or with any other dishonest intention, at the time the applications were filed. Consequently, the ground of opposition was not established.
The delegate ordered that both oppositions be dismissed and that the trade mark applications proceed to registration.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Intellectual Property
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Statutory Construction
-
Intention
-
Procedural Fairness
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
7
Statutory Material Cited
0
Crazy Ron's Communications Pty Ltd v Mobileworld Pty Ltd
[2004] FCAFC 196
Registrar of Trade Marks v Woolworths
[1999] FCA 1020
Pfizer Products Inc v Karam
[2006] FCA 1663