30 Jun 2010
HIGGINS COATINGS PTY LIMITED V HIGGINS GROUP HOLDINGS LIMITED HC WN CIV 2009-485-2594
- Citation
- openlaw-1d13a8d9_f392_47d0_a09f_3f944faa4f3e.pdf
- Court
- High Court
The Court found that although the respondent's HIGGINS mark had prominence and some instances of actual confusion occurred, painting services were not sufficiently complementary to create a likelihood of confusion under s 17(1)(a); however both proposed marks (HIGGINS COATINGS and the stylised HIGGINS) lack inherent distinctiveness under s 18(1)(b) because the surname HIGGINS and minor device/formatting additions do not impart the necessary capacity to distinguish, and therefore the trademark applications must be refused.