Re: Opposition by Zillow, Inc. to registration of trade mark application number 1872673 (classes 20,42) - Zillo + HUTCH in the name of Zillo & Co Pty Ltd
Case
•
[2020] ATMO 120
•13 July 2020
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Re: Opposition by Zillow, Inc. to registration of trade mark application number 1872673 (classes 20,42) - Zillo + HUTCH in the name of Zillo & Co Pty Ltd [2020] ATMO 120
[2020] ATMO 120
13 July 2020
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerned an opposition by Zillow, Inc. to the registration of the trade mark application number 1872673, comprising the word ZILLO combined with the word HUTCH, in classes 20 and 42, filed in the name of Zillo & Co Pty Ltd. The opposition was heard by Deputy Registrar Mary-Ann Cooper.
The primary legal issues before the Deputy Registrar were whether the applicant's trade mark was likely to cause confusion with the opponent's earlier trade marks, pursuant to sections 42(b), 58, and 60 of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth), and whether the applicant had established grounds for registration under section 62A of the Act. The opponent also raised grounds under section 52 of the Act.
The Deputy Registrar found that the opponent had failed to establish any of the grounds of opposition. In particular, the Deputy Registrar determined that there was no likelihood of confusion between the applicant's proposed mark and the opponent's earlier marks, considering the differences in the marks, the goods and services, and the respective trading channels. The opponent's arguments regarding bad faith and other grounds were also dismissed.
Consequently, the Deputy Registrar ordered that the opposition be dismissed and that the trade mark application proceed to registration.
The primary legal issues before the Deputy Registrar were whether the applicant's trade mark was likely to cause confusion with the opponent's earlier trade marks, pursuant to sections 42(b), 58, and 60 of the *Trade Marks Act 1995* (Cth), and whether the applicant had established grounds for registration under section 62A of the Act. The opponent also raised grounds under section 52 of the Act.
The Deputy Registrar found that the opponent had failed to establish any of the grounds of opposition. In particular, the Deputy Registrar determined that there was no likelihood of confusion between the applicant's proposed mark and the opponent's earlier marks, considering the differences in the marks, the goods and services, and the respective trading channels. The opponent's arguments regarding bad faith and other grounds were also dismissed.
Consequently, the Deputy Registrar ordered that the opposition be dismissed and that the trade mark application proceed to registration.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Intellectual Property
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Standing
-
Remedies
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
17
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