Dr August Wolff GmbH & Co. KG Arzneimittel v Combe International Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Australia Federal only
• Judge: STEWART J
• Judgment Date: 03 February 2020
• Neutral Citation: [2020] FCA 39
• Court: Federal Court
• Date: 03 February 2020

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Dr August Wolff GmbH & Co. KG Arzneimittel v Combe International Ltd [2020] FCA 39

File number:	NSD 1840 of 2017
Judge:	STEWART J
Date of judgment:	3 February 2020
Catchwords:	TRADE MARKS – registration – opposition – appeal under s 56 of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) against decision of the Registrar of Trade Marks refusing registration of the mark VAGISAN – whether a ground of opposition to registration of the marks is established pursuant to ss 44, 59 and 60 of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) – whether applicant’s mark is deceptively similar to the respondent’s marks in respect of similar goods – whether applicant’s mark likely to deceive or cause confusion because of reputation of respondent’s marks – whether applicant intended to use or authorise use of mark at priority date – appeal allowed ; EVIDENCE – admissibility of schedules of data extracted from database – evidence objected to on the basis of inadmissible hearsay under s 59 of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) – whether schedules constitute business records under s 69 of the Evidence Act – whether Court should exercise its discretion under s 135 of the Evidence Act to exclude the evidence ; EVIDENCE – admissibility of survey evidence – where evidence constitutes hearsay under s 59 of the Evidence Act – whether survey evidence constitutes business records under s 69 of the Evidence Act
Legislation:	Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) ss 50, 59, 69, 135, 190 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) ss 37AG, 37N Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) ss 10, 14, 44, 55, 56, 60 ,197 Trade Mark Regulations 1995 (Cth) r 17A.34
Cases cited:	1-800-Flowers.Com Inc v Registrar of Trade Marks[2012] FCA 209; 201 FCR 488 ACCC v Air New Zealand Limited (No 5)[2012] FCA 1479; 301 ALR 352 Apple v Registrar of Trade Marks[2014] FCA 1304; 109 IPR 187 Aristoc Ltd v Rysta Ltd[1945] AC 68 Aston v Harlee Manufacturing Co[1960] HCA 47; 103 CLR 391 Astway Pty Ltd v Council of the City of Gold Coast [2008] QCA 073; 159 LGERA 335 Austin, Nichols & Co Inc v Lodestar Anstalt [2012] FCAFC 8; 202 FCR 490 Australian Meat Group Pty Ltd v JBS Australia Pty Ltd [2018] FCAFC 207; 363 ALR 113 Berlei Hestia Industries Ltd v The Bali Company Inc [1973] HCA 43; 129 CLR 353 British Sugar Plc v James Robertson & Sons Ltd[1996] RPC 281 Campomar Sociedad Limitada v Nike International Ltd [2000] HCA 12; 202 CLR 45 Coca-Cola Company v All-Fect Distributors Ltd[1999] FCA 1721; 96 FCR 107 De Cordova v Vick Chemical Company(1951) 68 RPC 103; 1B IPR 496 E & J Gallo Winery v Lion Nathan Australia Pty Ltd[2009] FCAFC 27; 175 FCR 386 Edmonds-Jones Pty Ltd v Australian Women’s Hockey Association Inc[1999] NSWSC 285 Food Channel Network Pty Ltd v Television Food Network GP[2010] FCAFC 58; 185 FCR 9 Health World Ltd v Shin-Sun Australia Pty Ltd[2008] FCA 100; 75 IPR 478 Le Cordon Bleu BV v Cordon Bleu International Ltee[2000] FCA 1587; 50 IPR 1 McCormick & Co Inc v McCormick[2000] FCA 1335; 51 IPR 102 MID Sydney Pty Ltd v Australian Tourism Co Ltd [1998] FCA 1616; 90 FCR 236 Mond Staffordshire Refining Co Ltd v Harlem [1929] HCA 6; 41 CLR 475 Notarus v Barcelona Pty Ltd[2019] FCA 4; 138 IPR 304 Ocean Spray Cranberries Inc v Registrar of Trade Marks[2000] FCA 177; 47 IPR 579 Pfizer Products Inc v Karam [2006] FCA 1663; 237 ALR 787 Pham Global Pty Ltd v Insight Clinical Imaging Pty Ltd [2017] FCAFC 83; 251 FCR 379 Pioneer Computers Australia Pty Ltd v Pioneer KK[2009] FCA 135; 176 FCR 300 Polo Textile Industries Pty Ltd v Domestic Textile Corporation Pty Ltd[1993] FCA 203; 42 FCR 227 (also reported as [1993] FCA 265) Re Bali Brassiere Co Inc’s Registered Trade Mark and Berlei Ltd’s Application[1968] HCA 72; 118 CLR 128 Re J Lyons & Co Ltd’s Application [1959] RPC 120 REA Group Ltd v Real Estate 1 Ltd[2013] FCA 559; 217 FCR 327 Reckitt & Colman (Australia) Ltd v Boden[1945] HCA 12; 70 CLR 84 Registrar of Trade Marks v Woolworths[1999] FCAFC 1020; 93 FCR 365 Roach v Page (No 15) [2003] NSWSC 939 Samaan bht Samaan v Kentucky Fried Chicken Pty Ltd[2012] NSWSC 381 Shell Company of Australia Ltd v Esso Standard Oil (Australia) Ltd[1963] HCA 66; 109 CLR 407 Shell Company of Australia Ltd v Rohm and Haas Co [1948] HCA 27; (1949) 78 CLR 601 Shoshana Pty Ltd v 10th Cantanae Pty Ltd [1987] FCA 786; 18 FCR 285 (also reported at [1987] FCA 231) Singtel Optus Pty Ltd v Optum Inc [2018] FCA 575; 140 IPR 1 SMASolar Technology AG v Beyond the Building Systems Pty Ltd (No 5)[2012] FCA 1483 Southern Cross Airports Corp Pty Ltd v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue[2011] NSWSC 349 Southern Cross Refrigeration Co v Toowoomba Foundry Pty Ltd[1954] HCA 82; 91 CLR 592 Telstra Corporation Ltd v Phone Directories Company Australia Pty Ltd [2015] FCAFC 156; 237 FCR 388 Tenth (10th) Cantanae Pty Ltd v Shoshana Pty Ltd [1987] FCA 667; 79 ALR 299 Vivo International Corporation Pty Ltd v Tivo Inc[2012] FCAFC 159; 99 IPR 1 ; Oxford English Dictionary Online (Oxford University Press, December 2019) JD Heydon, Cross on Evidence (LexisNexis Australia, subscription service, January 2019 update)
Date of hearing:	8 – 10 April 2019
Registry:	New South Wales
Division:	General Division
National Practice Area:	Intellectual Property
Sub-area:	Trademarks
Category:	Catchwords
Number of paragraphs:	199
Counsel for the Appellant:	J Beaumont & G R Rubagotti
Solicitor for the Appellant:	Thomson Geer
Counsel for the Respondent:	E Heerey QC & F St John
Solicitor for the Respondent:	Ashurst

ORDERS

		NSD 1840 of 2017
BETWEEN:	DR AUGUST WOLFF GMBH & CO. KG ARZNEIMITTEL Appellant
AND:	COMBE INTERNATIONAL LTD Respondent
AND BETWEEN:	COMBE INTERNATIONAL LTD Cross-Appellant
AND:	DR AUGUST WOLFF GMBH & CO. KG ARZNEIMITTEL Cross-Respondent

JUDGE:	STEWART J
DATE OF ORDER:	3 February 2020

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The parties are directed to bring in agreed or competing orders that reflect the...