Trident Seafoods Corporation v Trident Foods Pty Ltd
Case
•
[2016] ATMO 45
•30 June 2016
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Trident Seafoods Corporation v Trident Foods Pty Ltd [2016] ATMO 45
[2016] ATMO 45
30 June 2016
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This matter concerns an application by Trident Foods Pty Ltd (the removal opponent) to remove from the Australian Register of Trade Marks the trade mark "TRIDENT" registered by Trident Seafoods Corporation (the removal applicant). The proceedings were before the Registrar of Trade Marks.
The primary legal issue before the Registrar was whether to admit certain evidence filed by the removal opponent, specifically Exhibits 5 and 6 attached to a declaration by Helen Peachey. These exhibits comprised screenshots of the United States Patent and Trade Mark Office (USPTO) trade mark database showing the removal applicant's registrations in that jurisdiction, and screenshots of the removal applicant's website displaying its "Trident Trade Mark" applied to seafood products. The removal opponent's own trade mark application in Australia was also noted.
The Registrar considered Regulation 21.19 of the Trade Mark Regulations 1995, which permits the Registrar to use relevant information not known to a party, provided that party is given notice and an opportunity to make representations. The Registrar was satisfied that the exhibits contained relevant information and that the removal opponent had inadvertently omitted them due to a filing error. The Registrar also noted that the removal applicant had been aware of this information for some time. Consequently, the Registrar allowed the requested information into evidence. The Registrar declined to admit a further declaration by Albert Terry on behalf of the removal applicant, citing its low probative value and late filing.
The primary legal issue before the Registrar was whether to admit certain evidence filed by the removal opponent, specifically Exhibits 5 and 6 attached to a declaration by Helen Peachey. These exhibits comprised screenshots of the United States Patent and Trade Mark Office (USPTO) trade mark database showing the removal applicant's registrations in that jurisdiction, and screenshots of the removal applicant's website displaying its "Trident Trade Mark" applied to seafood products. The removal opponent's own trade mark application in Australia was also noted.
The Registrar considered Regulation 21.19 of the Trade Mark Regulations 1995, which permits the Registrar to use relevant information not known to a party, provided that party is given notice and an opportunity to make representations. The Registrar was satisfied that the exhibits contained relevant information and that the removal opponent had inadvertently omitted them due to a filing error. The Registrar also noted that the removal applicant had been aware of this information for some time. Consequently, the Registrar allowed the requested information into evidence. The Registrar declined to admit a further declaration by Albert Terry on behalf of the removal applicant, citing its low probative value and late filing.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Intellectual Property
-
Administrative Law
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Procedural Fairness
-
Standing
-
Statutory Construction
-
Judicial Review
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Trident Seafoods Corporation v Trident Foods Pty Limited [2018] FCA 1490
Cases Citing This Decision
3
Trident Seafoods Corporation v Trident Foods Pty Limited
[2018] FCA 1490
Cases Cited
8
Statutory Material Cited
0
Woolly Bull Enterprises Pty Ltd v Reynolds
[2001] FCA 261
Pfizer Products Inc v Karam
[2006] FCA 1663
Austin, Nichols & Co Inc v Lodestar Anstalt
[2011] FCA 39