Australia clarifies law on foreign language marks
Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Australia clarifies law on foreign language marks

Australia’s High Court outlines the test for the analysis of the distinctiveness of foreign language marks

The trade marks in dispute in the case of Cantarella Bros v Modena Tradingwere marks for the Italian words for gold ("oro") and five stars ("cinque stelle"). Cantarella, the rights holder, sold coffees marketed under both marks, while Modena imported from Italy coffees using these names.

Cantarella sued Modena for infringement, which in turn cross-claimed for cancellation, arguing that the marks were not capable of distinguishing Cantarella’s goods from others in the market because they were used to denote the quality or character of the goods.

The Federal Court sided with Cantarella, finding that the two marks are sufficiently distinctive and that Modena infringed the marks. Justice Emmett noted that very few consumers in Australia understood the meaning of the words or the allusions to quality stemming from those words.

"The Full Federal Courtfound that these Italian words were commonly understood among coffee traders who see these terms as indicators of quality or character."

On appeal, the Full Federal Court (Justices Mansfield, Jacobson and Gilmour) unanimously overruled the trial decision, finding that the mark lacked distinctiveness. Noting Australia’s “rich cultural and ethnic diversities”, it found that the relevant population the court should be focusing on were coffee traders rather than the general population. Furthermore, it found that these Italian words were commonly understood among coffee traders who see these terms as indicators of quality or character.

The Supreme Court reversed the Full Federal Court’s ruling. In a majority decision (Chief Justice French along with Justices Hayne, Crennan and Kiefel, with Justice Gageler dissenting), it held that the proper test is to consider the “ordinary signification” of a word to the relevant users, whether it is in English or another language.

It found that that even among the coffee trading community, there was not enough evidence that the words carried a reference to the character or quality of the goods. The court found that Modena’s evidence that some Australian coffee traders saw the expression “five star” as an indication of quality or character fell short of proving that “cinque stelle” was understood to be a descriptive term.

Similarly, it found that Modena did not sufficiently prove that honest traders may legitimately wish to use these terms to describe the character or quality of their own goods.

A J L Bannon SC, M Green and Clayton Utz represented Cantarella, while I M Jackman SC, C L Cochrane and Corrs Chambers Westgarth acted for Modena Trading.

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

High-earning businesses place most value on the depth of the external legal teams advising them, according to a survey of nearly 29,000 in-house counsel
Kilpatrick Townsend was recognised as Americas firm of the year, while patent powerhouse James Haley won a lifetime achievement award
Partners at Foley Hoag and Kilburn & Strode explore how US and UK courts have addressed questions of AI and inventorship
In-house lawyers have considerable influence over law firms’ actions, so they must use that power to push their external advisers to adopt sustainable practices
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Counsel say they’re advising clients to keep a close eye on confidentiality agreements after the FTC voted to ban non-competes
Data from Managing IP+’s Talent Tracker shows US firms making major swoops for IP teams, while South Korea has also been a buoyant market
The finalists for the 13th annual awards have been announced
Counsel reveal how a proposal to create separate briefings for discretionary denials at the USPTO could affect their PTAB strategies
The UK Supreme Court rejected the firm’s appeal against an earlier ruling because it did not raise an arguable point of law
Gift this article