Richard Anthony v Glen Anthony Thorton

This matter concerned an application by Glen Anthony Thornton (the removal applicant) to remove a registered trade mark from the register, opposed by Richard Anthony (the opponent). The dispute arose from the removal applicant's assertion of being a "person aggrieved" by the trade mark's registration, a claim that was challenged by the opponent. The hearing was conducted before Rachel Dunn, a delegate of the Registrar of Trade Marks.

The primary legal issue before the delegate was whether the removal applicant had established standing as a "person aggrieved" under subsection 92(1) of the relevant legislation. This required determining if the removal applicant was appreciably disadvantaged, in a legal or practical sense, by the continued registration of the trade mark. The delegate also considered the use of the trade mark, but ultimately found it unnecessary to delve into this aspect due to the failure on the threshold issue of standing.

The delegate reasoned that to be a "person aggrieved," the applicant must demonstrate how they are disadvantaged by the trade mark's registration. The removal applicant had claimed to be aggrieved but provided no evidence or submissions explaining the basis for this claim, nor did they refer to any trade mark applications or registrations in their own name. Despite the opponent's challenge to standing, which placed the removal applicant on notice, no supporting evidence was provided in response. The delegate concluded that the removal applicant had failed to meet the threshold criterion for making the application.

Consequently, the delegate refused the removal application. The opponent sought its costs, and the delegate directed the unsuccessful removal applicant, Glen Anthony Thornton, to pay the opponent's costs in accordance with the Official Scale.