Region: New Zealand

Scams targeting trademark owners are fast becoming commonplace and increasingly sophisticated. Four leading IP offices share their insights on which scams are most prevalent, what you can do to stay safe, the resources on offer to help and how offices are collaborating across borders to fight fraudsters.

05 August 2021

These New Zealand opposition proceedings serve as a reminder that, even where the marks and the goods are found to be similar, the opponent is not always certain to win.

30 July 2021

This recent decision by the New Zealand Trademarks Office raises interesting issues as to the extent to which media-generated nicknames might be protectable.

29 June 2021

This decision provides helpful guidance on the principles for partial revocation of trademark registrations in New Zealand, while highlighting important differences between the law and practice on non-use removal proceedings in Australia and New Zealand.

28 April 2021

In our latest round-up, we look at the IP Office of New Zealand launching a new hearings initiative, Canopy Growth acquiring a leading marijuana brand, and much more.

13 April 2021

In a dispute between SC Johnson and Son and International Consolidated Business over the ZIPLOC mark, New Zealand’s highest court has effectively held that ‘zombie’ trademarks do exist in the country.

03 March 2021

In a star-studded launch event, Brand Finance held a virtual conference with speakers including Hilary Rodham Clinton, Carl Bildt and David Miliband.

26 February 2021

WTR spoke to brand experts on what recourse Buy New Zealand Made has available, as well as when entering the political fray is necessary to protect a mark’s reputation.

25 February 2021

This decision of the assistant commissioner demonstrates both the strengths and pitfalls of New Zealand’s unique ‘reverse onus’ opposition ground. 

23 February 2021

The Court of Appeal of New Zealand has confirmed that concurrent use of the marks ACTAZIN and ACTIPHEN was likely to cause confusion. In contrast, the Australian Trademarks Office had found that the marks were not deceptively similar.

01 September 2020