Warner-Lambert Company v Supermarketing (Vic) Pty Ltd

The dispute in *Warner-Lambert Company v Supermarketing (Vic) Pty Ltd* concerned the importation and sale of Listerine mouthwash. Warner-Lambert, the proprietor of the Listerine trademark, alleged that Supermarketing (Vic) Pty Ltd had infringed its trademark by importing and selling Listerine mouthwash that had been manufactured and sold overseas. The matter came before the Federal Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether Supermarketing's actions constituted an infringement of Warner-Lambert's registered trademark under the *Trade Marks Act 1955* (Cth). Specifically, the court had to determine if the imported goods were "substantially identical or deceptively similar" to goods for which the trademark was registered, and whether the use of the mark by Supermarketing was likely to deceive or cause confusion.

The court considered the principles of trademark infringement, particularly in the context of parallel importation. It was established that the proprietor of a registered trademark has the exclusive right to use that mark in Australia. The court found that Supermarketing had used a mark that was substantially identical to Warner-Lambert's registered mark on goods of the same description. The court reasoned that the origin of the goods was not a defence to infringement, and that the use of the mark by Supermarketing was likely to deceive or cause confusion as to the origin and sponsorship of the goods.

Consequently, the Federal Court of Australia granted an injunction restraining Supermarketing (Vic) Pty Ltd from importing, selling, or otherwise dealing with Listerine mouthwash that infringed Warner-Lambert's trademark.