Re: Opposition by Johnson & Johnson Pte. Ltd. to registration of trade mark application 1816315 (3,5,44) – ENRICH DERMATOLOGY COSMETIC CLINC (Fancy) - filed in the name of Michael Rich

This matter concerned an opposition by Johnson & Johnson Pte. Ltd. to the registration of the trade mark application 1816315, ENRICH DERMATOLOGY COSMETIC CLINIC (Fancy), filed in the name of Michael Rich. The opposition was heard by Nicholas Smith.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicant's trade mark should be refused registration under section 52 of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth) on the grounds that it was deceptively similar to existing trade marks owned by the opponent. The court also considered the application of section 41 of the Act.

Nicholas Smith found that the grounds of opposition were not established. The court applied the principles of deceptive similarity, considering the visual, aural, and conceptual aspects of the marks. It was determined that the applicant's mark, when considered as a whole, was not deceptively similar to the opponent's registered trade marks. Furthermore, the court found that the ground under section 41 was not established.

Consequently, the opposition was dismissed, and the trade mark application was allowed to proceed to registration.