Barefoot Lion mauls competitor
In E. & J. Gallo Winery v Lion Nathan Australia Pty Limited [2008] FCA 934 (20 June 2008) , a decision covering a wide range of trade mark issues, Lion Nathan (Lion) has successfully resisted an infringement application and, at the same time, managed to have a competitor’s trade mark removed for non-use. The decision provides some interesting insights into infringement under s120(2), the defence in that provision, a discussion about goods of the same description and, finally, some interesting views on non-use and the exercise of the discretion to let a trade mark stay on the register despite non-use for three years being established.
Apart from that smorgasbord of legal issues, the case provides a wonderful gem of insight into how Lion Nathan develops its trade marks. On this occasion, the Consumer Insight Manager was at the races and noticed ‘Barefootonbondi’ as the name of one of the horses. The moral of the story is that if you want a cool job with less stress than litigating trade mark law, you should go to the races more often. But I digress.
Continue Reading...
author of several major works relating to intellectual property and competition law. He is the co-author of the third edition of 
a book published in the intellectual property series of Cambridge University Press. He has also published two casebooks dealing with competition law and aspects of consumer protection. In addition to his doctorate on sui generis protection of databases, he has a diploma in Indonesian language and studies and he is the winner of three Australian Research Council large grants.