Re: Opposition by Doreen Fielding to application under section 92 of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) by Sareen Holdings Pty Ltd to remove trade mark number 1208086 (classes 19 and 20) - Sareen Stone (stylised) in..

Case

[2020] ATMO 127

29 July 2020


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Re: Opposition by Doreen Fielding to application under section 92 of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) by Sareen Holdings Pty Ltd to remove trade mark number 1208086 (classes 19 and 20) - Sareen Stone (stylised) in.. [2020] ATMO 127 [2020] ATMO 127 29 July 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This matter concerned an application by Doreen Fielding to remove trade mark number 1208086, registered as "Sareen Stone" (stylised) in classes 19 and 20, from the Register of Trade Marks. The application for removal was brought under section 92 of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth). The hearing officer, Louise Tuohy, considered the arguments presented by both parties.

The primary legal issue before the hearing officer was whether the trade mark should be removed from the Register on the grounds that the removal opponent, Ms. Fielding, or an authorised user, had not demonstrated use of the trade mark. Specifically, the hearing officer had to determine if the conditions under subsection 92(4)(b) of the Act were met, which would necessitate the removal of the trade mark.

In her reasoning, the hearing officer found that the evidence presented by the applicant for removal did not establish sufficient use of the trade mark by either the registered owner or an authorised user. Consequently, the hearing officer concluded that the discretion to allow the trade mark to remain on the Register could not be exercised in favour of the registered owner. The hearing officer ordered that the trade mark be removed from the Register.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Intellectual Property

  • Administrative Law

  • Statutory Interpretation

Legal Concepts

  • Jurisdiction

  • Remedies

  • Procedural Fairness

  • Statutory Construction