Re: Opposition by Cocktails & Canvas Asset Corp Pty Ltd to registration of trade mark applications 1822164 (41) - Cork & Chroma (Fancy), 1822170 (41) - Cork & Chroma Paint and SIP and 1822172 (41) - Cork & Chroma

This matter concerned oppositions filed by Cocktails & Canvas Asset Corp Pty Ltd (the Opponent) against three trade mark applications by an unnamed applicant: application number 1822164 for "Cork & Chroma (Fancy)", application number 1822170 for "Cork & Chroma Paint and SIP", and application number 1822172 for "Cork & Chroma". The oppositions were heard by Nicholas Smith, Hearing Officer.

The primary legal issue before the Hearing Officer was whether the Opponent had established grounds for opposing the registration of the applicant's trade marks. Specifically, the Opponent relied on grounds under sections 41 and 60 of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth).

The Hearing Officer found that the Opponent had failed to establish the ground of opposition under section 60 of the Act. This conclusion was based on the Opponent's failure to file any supporting evidence for this ground. Furthermore, the limited evidence provided, which was heavily redacted, did not satisfy the Hearing Officer that the Opponent had acquired a sufficient reputation in Australia for its own trade marks, "CORK & CANVAS" or "PAINT AND SIP", prior to the relevant date. Consequently, the Hearing Officer determined that neither section 41 nor section 60 grounds were established.

The Hearing Officer ordered that the three trade mark applications could proceed to registration, subject to a one-month waiting period from the decision date, unless an appeal was filed. The applicant was awarded costs against the Opponent in respect of application 1822164, and reduced costs in respect of applications 1822170 and 1822172, following the general rule that costs follow the event.