Re: Oppositions by Danteng Pty Ltd to applications under section 92 of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) by Jaguar Land Rover Limited to remove trade mark numbers 1290917 SVA [fancy] and 1290918 SVA - both in..
Case
•
[2020] ATMO 108
•19 June 2020
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Re: Oppositions by Danteng Pty Ltd to applications under section 92 of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) by Jaguar Land Rover Limited to remove trade mark numbers 1290917 SVA [fancy] and 1290918 SVA - both in.. [2020] ATMO 108
[2020] ATMO 108
19 June 2020
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered oppositions by Danteng Pty Ltd to applications by Jaguar Land Rover Limited for the removal of trade mark numbers 1290917 SVA and 1290918 SVA from the register. The applications for removal were based on allegations of non-use of the trade marks.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the trade marks had been genuinely used in Australia in relation to the goods and services for which they were registered. If non-use was established for some goods or services, the Tribunal was required to consider whether to exercise its discretion to remove the trade marks from the register entirely, or to remove them only in respect of the non-used goods and services.
The Tribunal found that there had been use of both trade marks in relation to certain goods and services. However, it also found that there had been no use of the marks in relation to other specified goods and services. Applying the principles of genuine use and considering the discretion afforded to it under the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth), the Tribunal determined that it was appropriate to exercise its discretion to allow the trade marks to remain on the register, but only in respect of those goods and services for which use had been established. The remainder of the goods and services were to be removed from the register.
The primary legal issue before the Tribunal was whether the trade marks had been genuinely used in Australia in relation to the goods and services for which they were registered. If non-use was established for some goods or services, the Tribunal was required to consider whether to exercise its discretion to remove the trade marks from the register entirely, or to remove them only in respect of the non-used goods and services.
The Tribunal found that there had been use of both trade marks in relation to certain goods and services. However, it also found that there had been no use of the marks in relation to other specified goods and services. Applying the principles of genuine use and considering the discretion afforded to it under the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth), the Tribunal determined that it was appropriate to exercise its discretion to allow the trade marks to remain on the register, but only in respect of those goods and services for which use had been established. The remainder of the goods and services were to be removed from the register.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Commercial Law
-
Intellectual Property
-
Statutory Interpretation
Legal Concepts
-
Remedies
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
4
Statutory Material Cited
1
Woolly Bull Enterprises Pty Ltd v Reynolds
[2001] FCA 261
Woolly Bull Enterprises Pty Ltd v Reynolds
[2001] FCA 261
McHattan v Australian Specialised Vehicle Systems Pty Ltd
[1996] FCA 481