Wistron Corporation v Zheng Shi
Case
•
[2013] ATMO 25
•2 May 2013
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Wistron Corporation v Zheng Shi [2013] ATMO 25
[2013] ATMO 25
2 May 2013
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The applicant, Wistron Corporation, sought to register trade mark application 1332624. The opponent, Zheng Shi, opposed this application. The decision was made by Bianca Irgang, presumably in a tribunal or court with jurisdiction over trade mark matters in Australia, such as the Administrative Appeals Tribunal or the Federal Court.
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the grounds of opposition raised by Zheng Shi against Wistron Corporation's trade mark application had been established. Specifically, the court was required to determine if the opposition, particularly concerning grounds argued under section 60 of the relevant Act, had been met by the opponent.
The court found that the opponent, Zheng Shi, had successfully discharged the onus placed upon it regarding the grounds of opposition argued at the hearing, specifically those under section 60. Applying subsection 55(1) of the Act, which mandates the Registrar to decide whether to refuse or register a trade mark having regard to established grounds of opposition, the court determined that registration should be refused. The court also applied the general principle that costs usually follow the event and awarded costs against the applicant, Wistron Corporation, in accordance with Schedule 8 of the Regulations.
The primary legal issue before the court was whether the grounds of opposition raised by Zheng Shi against Wistron Corporation's trade mark application had been established. Specifically, the court was required to determine if the opposition, particularly concerning grounds argued under section 60 of the relevant Act, had been met by the opponent.
The court found that the opponent, Zheng Shi, had successfully discharged the onus placed upon it regarding the grounds of opposition argued at the hearing, specifically those under section 60. Applying subsection 55(1) of the Act, which mandates the Registrar to decide whether to refuse or register a trade mark having regard to established grounds of opposition, the court determined that registration should be refused. The court also applied the general principle that costs usually follow the event and awarded costs against the applicant, Wistron Corporation, in accordance with Schedule 8 of the Regulations.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Intellectual Property
-
Administrative Law
Legal Concepts
-
Costs
-
Statutory Construction
-
Remedies
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
12
Statutory Material Cited
0
Pfizer Products Inc v Karam
[2006] FCA 1663
Chocolaterie Guylian N.V. v Registrar of Trade Marks
[2009] FCA 891
Sports Warehouse, Inc v Fry Consulting Pty Ltd
[2010] FCA 664