Re: Opposition by Seven Network (Operations) Ltd to registration of trade mark application number 1970937 (classes 9, 38, and 41) - 7 HD with device - in the name of Bangkok Broadcasting & TV Co. Ltd

This matter concerned an opposition by Seven Network (Operations) Ltd to the registration of a trade mark application by Bangkok Broadcasting & TV Co. Ltd for "7 HD with device" in classes 9, 38, and 41. The opposition was brought under various sections of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth), including section 60, which relates to the use of a trade mark in Australia such that it is likely to deceive or cause confusion. The decision was made by Blake Knowles, Delegate of the Registrar of Trade Marks.

The legal issues before the Delegate were whether the opponent had established any of the grounds for opposition pleaded, specifically under sections 42(b), 44, 59, and 60 of the *Trade Marks Act 1995*. The burden of proof rested on the opponent to establish one or more of these grounds on the balance of probabilities, with the rights of the parties assessed as at the relevant date.

The Delegate found that the opponent had successfully established the ground of opposition under section 60. This was based on extensive evidence demonstrating the opponent's significant and widespread use of various iterations of the "7" trade mark in Australia in relation to television broadcasting, entertainment services, and associated goods and services. The evidence highlighted the prominence of the Seven Network in the Australian free-to-air television landscape and its substantial engagement with the Australian population. Crucially, the evidence showed the opponent had commenced use of a high-definition channel under the trade mark "7HD" between 2007 and 2010, and again from 2016. Given that the section 60 ground was established, the Delegate did not need to consider the remaining grounds of opposition.

Consequently, the Delegate ordered that the registration of the trade mark application be refused. The refusal was to be recorded one month from the date of the decision, unless a notice of appeal was served on the Registrar of Trade Marks. The opponent was also awarded costs against the applicant.