Court: Federal Court of Australia

The Federal Court of Australia has ruled that Schweppes’ payments under an exclusive bottling agreement with PepsiCo did not include a component for the use of intellectual property or qualify as “royalties”.

13 August 2024

Despite prior reluctance to award significant sums for additional damages, the Federal Court of Australia has awarded A$250,000 to deter infringement.

26 July 2024

The decision provides useful guidance on what trademark use can be established by use on a banner on a website with links to other pages. 

12 June 2024

The Federal Court confirmed that the mark MELBOURNE BONE AND JOINT CLINIC was not capable of distinguishing the applicant’s services from those of other traders.

27 March 2024

The Full Court found that the primary judge had made an error in awarding nominal damages of A$8,250 because such amount was not nominal. 

18 March 2024

The finding that use of a three-dimensional trademark was supported by a two-dimensional use is significant.

08 March 2024

The decision highlights the limitations of enforcing trademarks registered in a composite form or in a particular stylised form.

06 February 2024

While use of BIG JACK was likely to lead consumers to draw a comparison with McDonald's BIG MAC, this alone did not demonstrate an intention to adopt the mark for the purpose of misleading consumers.   

12 December 2023

This case considers the difference between product certification and the provision of certification services.

04 December 2023

A key takeaway is that the inherent capacity of a foreign mark to distinguish the goods/services for which it is registered may depend on the trade relevant to those goods/services.

27 November 2023