Red Generation Corporation Limited v Luckin Coffee Group Co. Ltd

Red Generation Corporation Limited opposed the registration of the trade mark application number 2073099, "luckin coffee EXPRESS with device," by Luckin Coffee Group Co. Ltd. The opposition was heard by Katrina Brown, a Hearing Officer in the Trade Marks and Designs section.

The primary legal issue before the Hearing Officer was whether the applicant's trade mark was substantially identical with, or deceptively similar to, the opponent's registered trade marks, specifically trade mark number 205, "Lukkin Leo" with a tiger device, and trade mark number 170. This determination was crucial for establishing the ground of opposition under section 44 of the relevant Act.

The Hearing Officer applied the test for substantial identity from *Shell Company of Australia Ltd v Esso Standard Oil (Australia) Ltd*, comparing the marks side by side and assessing their essential features and overall impression. It was found that the trade mark and Registration 205 were not substantially identical due to clear differences. For deceptive similarity, the Hearing Officer considered the impression left on a person of ordinary intelligence and memory, allowing for imperfect recollection, and examining the look, sound, and idea conveyed by the marks. While acknowledging the visual and aural similarity between "luckin" and "Lukkin," the Hearing Officer concluded that the trade marks, when considered in their entirety, including other word and device elements, were not deceptively similar.

As the ground of opposition under section 44 was not established, the Hearing Officer decided that trade mark application number 2073099 could proceed to registration one month from the date of the decision, subject to any appeal. The applicant was awarded costs against the opponent.