11 Apr 2016
CROCODILE INTERNATIONAL PTE LTD v LACOSTE [2016] NZCA 111
- Citation
- (2016) 14 TCLR 333
- Court
- Court of Appeal
The two-stage s7(1)(a) test is correct and there is no separate requirement to identify 'essential elements' before applying it; the crocodile device is the dominant element of registered mark 70068 and differences in orientation, font and word placement were insignificant, so use of other Lacoste marks featuring substantially similar crocodile devices constituted use of mark 70068; accordingly the revocation application fails and the appeal is dismissed.