IP Australia rejects BP’s green colour mark application
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 2023

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

IP Australia rejects BP’s green colour mark application

The Australian trade mark registrar has rejected BP’s application for a green colour mark


BP's logo

In a June decision, the examiner from IP Australia once again denied BP’s application for a green colour mark, siding with an objection filed by retail chain Woolworths. BP’s application (no 909518) covered classes 4 (fuels provided through service stations), 37 (vehicle service stations and services) and 43 (take-away food services). The IP Office found that there was not sufficient evidence that the colour served as a means to distinguish BP’s goods.

BP’s original application was filed in April 2002, and has been subject to several challenges from Woolworths, from the registrar’s office all the way to theFull Federal Court. While the original application referred to “the colour green shown in the representation on the application form”, BP amended the claim in 2012 to define a specific shade, Pantone 348C. However, this amendment failed to convince the examiner, who noted that stating the specific shade would not have any effect on the issue of whether the colour mark was distinctive. This is in line with an examination report from early 2013, in which the examiner noted that referencing the Pantone colour does not change the mark in any way nor does it help to establish that the mark would help distinguish the source of BP’s goods.

The same examiner report also noted single colour marks are “usually considered to be devoid of inherent adaptation to distinguish” and that the evidence required to sustain a single colour mark application generally has to be “extremely persuasive”.

BP is represented by Davies Collison Cave and has until July 17 to appeal.

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

James Lawrence, partner at Addisons, explains how he convinced the full Federal Court of Australia to back his client in a patent dispute concerning mining safety equipment
The deal will allow the companies to use each other’s patents covering 4G and 5G technologies, and other cellular SEPs
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis coverage from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Three lead IP counsel in the US, the UK and China share how they walk the fine line between building in-house competence and splurging on external lawyers
Mike Renaud, head of the IP division at Mintz, explains his business strategy and how the firm justifies charging higher rates
Sources say firms must build relationships with clients that transcend their connections to individual partners
INTA’s resolution on online marketplaces and appointment of Amazon’s general counsel follow calls for the association to take a direct position on internet fakes
Counsel report where they’re seeing more issues with inventorship arise and how they’re getting this work in the first place
To mark the firm’s one-year anniversary, partners at Groombridge Wu Baughman & Stone reveal the biggest challenges of getting a new firm off the ground
Each week Managing IP speaks to a different IP lawyer about their life and career