Each month we produce a summary of the Australian Trade Marks Office decisions to provide practitioners and brand owners with a succinct, accessible database detailing current trends in Australian trade marks practice.

TchenKilTchun [2014] ATMO 28 (2 April 2014)

LANCASTER, it’s a name, it’s a place, but is it a Trade Mark?

Application for LANCASTER refused as applicant was unable to provide sufficient evidence of use (section 41).  
Read full article >>

Hasbro, Inc v MogensRudSvendsen [2014] ATMO 29 (4 April 2014)

Colonel Mustard, in the Library, with the Candlestick!

Application for stylised version of QLUDO successfully opposed by owner of CLUEDO trade marks (section 44). 
Read full article >>

Domain Shield Pty Ltd [2014] ATMO 30 (7 April 2014)

Registrants, Shield your Domain!

Application for DOMAIN SHIELD refused under section 41 and attempt to address objection would fall foul of section 43 (sections 41 and 43). 
Read full article >>

Sanofi-Aventis Healthcare Pty Ltd v Russian Federation [2014] ATMO 32 (17 April 2014)

MICRO differences between marks.

Stylised MICRO GEN application opposed by owner of MICROGENICS registrations (section 44). 
Read full article >>

CSR Limited v China South Locomotive & Rolling Stock Corporation [2014] ATMO 33 (29 April 2014)

Sweet Shift in Commercial Focus.

One time sugar company, CSR, able to defend non-use action after non-use applicant narrowed its application too far (section 92). 
Read full article >>

MG Icon LLC v Caprice Australia Pty Ltd [2014] ATMO 34 (30 April 2014)

Lowering the Bar on Procedural Fairness?

Opponent denied extension of time under new Australian Law, after extensions were granted earlier in the same proceedings(Regulation 9.18). 
Read full article >>