9 Jul 2019
Leave to appeal was granted solely on the question of whether the Court of Appeal correctly interpreted s 68(2) of the Trade Marks Act 2002; other grounds were dismissed because only that statutory interpretation question raised an issue of principle appropriate for leave.
19 Mar 2019
The Court held that s68(2) does not change the long-established practice permitting an applicant to file for registration prior to the formal order of removal of an earlier registration; Johnson's application of 19 April 2013 was valid and not barred by ICB's registration which was effective as removed from 22 April 2013; prior use that predates the continuous statutory non-use period cannot be relied on to preserve ownership after revocation for non-use; therefore Johnson's application 975954 is to proceed to registration and the High Court's backdating to 19 April 2013 and referral back to…
5 Dec 2013
On the balance of probabilities the Court found that Jim/FFB consented to Michael registering and using the Valleygirl and TEMT marks in New Zealand in 2003 and that Michael consistently acted on that basis thereafter; the 2008 agreements and subsequent conduct did not demonstrate that Michael was required to relinquish ownership of the New Zealand marks; accordingly the High Court was correct to declare that the appellants' later New Zealand registrations were invalid and to dismiss appellants' infringement/passing off/Fair Trading Act claims.
19 Dec 2012
The Court found on the balance of probabilities that Michael Ma registered the New Zealand Valleygirl and Temt trade marks in 2003 with the consent of Jim Marr/FFB and thereafter VGNZ consistently relied on that right; FFB's applications in 2009–2010 were brought despite knowing Ma's marks were valid and thus were made in bad faith; Ma's marks were therefore wrongly revoked and FFB's 2010 New Zealand registrations are invalid and must be removed; accordingly VGNZ succeeds in its claims including for injunctive relief and FFB's claims fail.