When people think of trade marks, famous brands, business names or logos generally spring to mind, such as the McDonald’s ‘M’ or Apple Inc.’s apple. But phrases that are associated with a brand, such as Nike’s famous slogan, “Just Do It“, can also be registered as trade marks. Over the years, various celebrities have also […]
We first wrote about trade mark attorney privilege and the changes to the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) as a result of the Raising the Bar legislation here and, more recently in relation to Titan Enterprises (Qld) Pty Ltd v Cross  FCA 1241 (Titan Garages case), here. Since our most recent blog on the […]
A recent Federal Court judgment1 in respect of an interlocutory dispute over access to documents produced under subpoena has cast the first rays of judicial light on a relatively recent statutory provision protecting client-trade marks attorney privilege. The judgment in Titan Enterprises (Qld) Pty Ltd v Cross  FCA 1241 (Titan v Cross) indicates that, although client-trade […]
Federal Court of Australia – National Court Framework reforms. The IP Practice Note is a must read for IP lawyers and attorneys
On 25 October 2016, the Federal Court of Australia (FCA) published 26 new practice notes as part of the National Court Framework reforms. Amongst these is the Intellectual Property Practice Note (IP-1) which establishes guidelines for all current and future Intellectual Property matters in the FCA. The practice note updates and expands the previous practice […]
Popular craft beer manufacturer, Stone & Wood, were claiming that Thunder Road’s use of the names ‘Pacific Ale’ and ‘Pacific’ was causing confusion among consumers, leading them to order a Thunder Road beer when what they really wanted was a Stone & Wood. The beer rivals’ labels are below – confused, or not so much?
Last week the Federal Court handed down its judgment in Lodestar Anstalt v Campari America LLC  FCAFC 92, which was an appeal from the decision in Skyy Sprits LLC v Lodestar Anstalt  FCA 509. The judgment clarified how the Full Federal Court’s decision in Yau’s Entertainment Pty Ltd v Asia Television Ltd  […]