Societe Guy Laroche v Uniopt GmbH

Societe Guy Laroche (the opponent) opposed an application by Uniopt GmbH (the applicant) to register a trade mark. The dispute concerned the ownership of the trade mark and whether the applicant was entitled to registration. The decision was made by Terry Williams, a Hearing Officer, under delegation from the Registrar of Trade Marks.

The legal issues before the court were whether the applicant was the owner of the trade mark under section 58 of the relevant legislation, and whether the applicant's proposed mark was deceptively similar to existing marks under sections 44 and 60. The opponent argued that the trade mark was actually owned by Dr. Micheal Pachleitner, the Chief Executive Officer and majority shareholder of the applicant, rather than the applicant company itself.

The Hearing Officer considered the evidence presented, including statements from Dr. Pachleitner indicating an informal licence agreement between himself and the applicant. While acknowledging a procedural irregularity in the applicant's evidence, the Hearing Officer decided to give it weight, deeming it unjust to strike out the entire filing at a late stage, particularly as little of the applicant's evidence was critical to the decision. The Hearing Officer found that no ground of opposition had been established, noting that evidence of use of the trade mark in Australia was minimal and some documentary evidence was of insufficient date.

Consequently, the Hearing Officer ordered that the trade mark application could proceed to registration one month from the date of the decision, unless an appeal was filed. The opponent was also ordered to pay the applicant's costs.