Lever Bros, Ltd v Lewis Grant Abrams [1909] HCA 32
The trade mark sought by the respondent is so closely resembling the appellants' mark, applied to goods sufficiently similar in class and trade, that it is likely to deceive the public into believing that the respondent's goods are those of the appellants. Registration should therefore not be granted.
- Parties
- Appellant: Lever Bros., Ltd.; Respondent: Lewis Grant Abrams
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 27 May 1909
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Appeal From Decision of the Registrar of Trade Marks
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Trade Marks, Likelihood of Deception, Registration of Trade Mark, Class of Goods, Similarity of Goods
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Lever Bros., Ltd.
Appellant
Lewis Grant Abrams
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal From Decision of the Registrar of Trade Marks
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the mark sought to be registered by the respondent is likely to deceive the public into thinking goods are those of the appellants
- 2 Whether the goods of the respondent are 'the like goods, or class of goods' with those of the appellants within the meaning of sec. 25 of the Trade Marks Act 1905
Ratio Decidendi
The trade mark sought by the respondent is so closely resembling the appellants' mark, applied to goods sufficiently similar in class and trade, that it is likely to deceive the public into believing that the respondent's goods are those of the appellants. Registration should therefore not be granted.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed
Orders
- Application for registration of the respondent's trade mark refused
- Respondent to pay the costs of the appeal and costs before the Registrar, to be taxed in this Court
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment