Archive | Federal Circuit Court Decisions

Trademark Lawyer Sydney – Federal Circuit and Family Court – QUANTUM GROUP Appeal

Quantum Group Holding Pty Ltd v Thomson [2021] FedCFamC2G 339 (24 December 2021) Partly successful appeal by Quantum Group from the Registrar’s decision. The Registrar’s delegate upheld the opposition by Thompson to trademark registration of the QUANTUM GROUP Logo mark shown below filed on 10 July 2014 for various financial, insurance and real estate services […]

Trademark Lawyer Sydney – Federal Circuit Court – Love where you live

Metricon Homes Pty Ltd v Zac Homes Pty Ltd [2021] FCCA 394 (10 March 2021) Unsuccessful infringement action by Metricon. Metricon alleged Zac Homes infringed its trademark registration for ‘Love where you live’ by using (1) ‘You love where you live’ as part of a sentence in a radio advertisement and (2) ‘Love where you […]

Trademark Lawyer Sydney – Federal Circuit Court Appeal – BLACK SHEEP

Chris and Dora Di Lorenzo Partnership v Denversian Pty Ltd & Anor [2020] FCCA 1718 (30 June 2020) Unsuccessful appeal by Di Lorenzo against the Registrar’s decision which dismissed their opposition to registration of the trade mark BLACK SHEEP for restaurant, café and bistro services in class 43. Background Denversian applied, on 10 September 2015, […]

Trademark Lawyer Sydney – Federal Circuit Court – MALISHUS

Lamont v Malishus Limited & Ors (No.4) [2019] FCCA 3206 (14 November 2019) Successful action for trade mark infringement by Lamont. None of the parties were professionally represented. Two of the respondents infringed Lamont’s trademark registrations for MALISHUS in class 25. Lamont owned four registrations for trade marks containing or consisting of the word MALISHUS, […]

Trademark Lawyer Sydney – Federal Circuit Court- MDerma

C&S Investments Pty Ltd v Klinic Solutions Australasia Pty Ltd [2019] FCCA 1741 (24 June 2019) Unsuccessful trademark infringement claim by C&S and successful cross-claim by Klinic. C&S owned a trademark registration for MDerma dating from 29 September 2015 and covering therapeutic cosmetic treatment apparatus in class 10 and cosmetic treatment services in class 44. […]

Trademark Lawyer – Federal Circuit Court – Austbar

Austbar Pty Ltd v ABA Australian Bar Association Ltd (No.2) [2018] FCCA 2091 (31 July 2018) In the Federal Circuit Court, the Australian Bar Association (ABA) was successful in its application for summary dismissal under s17A of Austbar’s appeal from a decision by the Registrar of Trade Marks rejecting its oppositions to trade mark registration […]

Trademark Lawyer – Federal Circuit Court – Briner v Happy Herb – Copyright

Briner v The Happy Herb Company & Ors [2017] FCCA 1854 (11 September 2017) This is another case about a business using a copyright image on its website and involved similar issues to the Tylor v Sevin case reported here . Businesses do need to be aware of, and take responsibility for, copyright considerations when using […]

Trademark Lawyer – Federal Circuit Court – Counterfeit G-STAR Products

TM25 Holding B.V. & Ors v Redac International Pty Ltd & Ors [2016] FCCA 113 (12 February 2016) This case involved the importation and sale of counterfeit G-STAR clothing by the respondents who represented themselves. The evidence filed by the parties is discussed in detail by Burchardt J with his Honour noting that the witnesses called […]

Trademark Lawyers – Federal Circuit Court – ALKAVIVA

Hamilton v Stark [2015] FCCA 3309 (14 December 2015) Unsuccessful appeal by Hamilton from a Registrar’s decision dismissing an opposition to trademark registration of ALKAVIVA filed on 6 June 2012 for water filtering apparatus in class 11. The parties were competitors in the field of equipment for alkalising drinking water. Before the Registrar, Hamilton had […]

Trademark Lawyers Australia – Federal Circuit Court – Monte

Monte v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd [2015] FCCA 1633 (7 August 2015) Fairfax was ordered to pay $10,001 as damages for breach of copyright in publishing a photograph of Ms Sharon Sargeant, the partner of Mr George Monte who owned copyright in the photograph published as part of a story critical of Mr Monte. […]