Safety Step (NZ) Limited v Illinois Tool Works Inc
Case
•
[2007] ATMO 78
•27 November 2007
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Safety Step (NZ) Limited v Illinois Tool Works Inc [2007] ATMO 78
[2007] ATMO 78
27 November 2007
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This decision concerns an application for trade mark registration by Illinois Tool Works Inc. (the applicant) and an opposition filed by Safety Step (NZ) Limited (the opponent). The matter was heard by Debrett Lyons, a Hearing Officer in Trade Marks Hearings.
The primary legal issue before the Hearing Officer was whether any of the grounds of opposition raised by Safety Step (NZ) Limited against Illinois Tool Works Inc.'s trade mark application had been established. The Hearing Officer was required to determine the registration status of the trade mark based on the established grounds of opposition, as stipulated by section 55 of the relevant Act.
The Hearing Officer found that no grounds of opposition had been established by the opponent. Consequently, applying section 55 of the Act, the Hearing Officer directed that the trade mark application be registered one month from the date of the decision. The Hearing Officer also ordered that if a notice of appeal was served on the Registrar before that time, the registration would be stayed pending the outcome of the appeal. In relation to costs, the Hearing Officer ordered that the opponent pay the applicant's costs according to the official scale, given that the opposition had not been successful.
The primary legal issue before the Hearing Officer was whether any of the grounds of opposition raised by Safety Step (NZ) Limited against Illinois Tool Works Inc.'s trade mark application had been established. The Hearing Officer was required to determine the registration status of the trade mark based on the established grounds of opposition, as stipulated by section 55 of the relevant Act.
The Hearing Officer found that no grounds of opposition had been established by the opponent. Consequently, applying section 55 of the Act, the Hearing Officer directed that the trade mark application be registered one month from the date of the decision. The Hearing Officer also ordered that if a notice of appeal was served on the Registrar before that time, the registration would be stayed pending the outcome of the appeal. In relation to costs, the Hearing Officer ordered that the opponent pay the applicant's costs according to the official scale, given that the opposition had not been successful.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Intellectual Property
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Costs
-
Statutory Construction
-
Appeal
-
Remedies
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Hills Industries Ltd v Bitek Pty Ltd [2011] FCA 94
Cases Citing This Decision
7
South Cone Inv v Reg Barton Spencer
[2007] ATMO 43
South Cone Inv v Reg Barton Spencer
[2007] ATMO 43
South Cone Inv v Reg Barton Spencer
[2007] ATMO 43
Cases Cited
12
Statutory Material Cited
0
Stingray Surf Co Pty Ltd v Lister
[1997] ATMO 3
Stingray Surf Co Pty Ltd v Lister
[1997] ATMO 3
Aston v Harlee Manufacturing Co
[1960] HCA 47