Taylor v Killer Queen LLCCitation:[2026] HCA 5Before:Gordon ACJ, Steward, Gleeson, Jagot, Beech-Jones JJDate:11 Mar 2026Case Number:S49/2025Read more

Taylor v Killer Queen LLCCitation:[2026] HCA 5Before:Gordon ACJ, Steward, Gleeson, Jagot, Beech-Jones JJDate:11 Mar 2026Case Number:S49/2025Read more

The Court held that the use of the 'Katie Perry' trade mark was not likely to deceive or cause confusion at the priority date or at the time of the rectification application, and that there was insufficient evidence of reputation or wrongful conduct to justify rectification.

Parties
Appellant: Katie Taylor; First Respondent: Killer Queen LLC; Second Respondent: Katy Perry
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 March 2026
Procedural Posture
Intellectual Property Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Trade Marks, Rectification of Register, Likelihood of Confusion, Reputation
Intellectual Property Law Trade Marks Rectification of Register Likelihood of Confusion Reputation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Katie Taylor

Appellant

Killer Queen LLC

First Respondent

Katy Perry

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Intellectual Property Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the use of 'Katie Perry' trade mark at the priority date was likely to deceive or cause confusion due to the reputation of the pop star's trade mark
  2. 2 Whether the use of 'Katie Perry' trade mark at the time of application for rectification was likely to deceive or cause confusion because of circumstances at that time
  3. 3 Whether the discretion not to rectify the Register under the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) was enlivened

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the use of the 'Katie Perry' trade mark was not likely to deceive or cause confusion at the priority date or at the time of the rectification application, and that there was insufficient evidence of reputation or wrongful conduct to justify rectification.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The rectification application is dismissed.
  • The registration of the 'Katie Perry' trade mark remains on the Register.