Lomas v Winton Shire Council [2002] FCAFC 413

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Lomas v Winton Shire Council [2002] FCAFC 413

TRADE MARKS – application for registration of – grounds for rejection of – conditions or limitations upon grant of – nature of proceedings of an opposition to grant of – similarity to opposition proceedings under the Patents Act 1990 (Cth) - quasi summary nature of an opposition proceeding against a grant of – what constitutes "use" of – what constitutes intention to use, prior to priority date – role of appellant court The Constitution, s 75 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s24(1A) Patents Act 1990 (Cth) Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth), ss 27(1), 41, 42, 43, 46, 52, 54(1), 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 191(2), 193, 195, 197. Imperial Chemical Industries PLC v EI Dupont De Nemours & Co [2002] FCAFC 264, followed. Moorgate Tobacco Co Ltd v Phillip Morris Ltd and Anor [No. 2] (1984) 156 CLR 414, cited. SAP Australia Pty Ltd v Sapient Australia Pty Ltd [1999] FCA 1821, followed. Shell Company of Australia Ltd v Rohm and Haas Company & Anor (1949) 78 CLR 60, followed. Re Hicks' Trademark (1897) 22 VLR 636, followed. Aston v Harlee Manufacturing Company (1960) 103 CLR 391, followed. BRENDA MAURICEEN LOMAS v WINTON SHIRE COUNCIL & THE WALTZING MATILDA CENTRE LTD Q98 OF 2002 COOPER, KIEFEL & EMMETT JJ 11 DECEMBER 2002 BRISBANE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY Q98 OF 2002

ON APPEAL FROM A SINGLE JUDGE OF THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

BETWEEN: BRENDA MAURICEEN LOMAS

APPELLANT

AND: WINTON SHIRE COUNCIL

FIRST RESPONDENT

THE WALTZING MATILDA CENTRE LTD

SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGES: COOPER, KIEFEL & EMMETT JJ

DATE OF ORDER: 11 DECEMBER 2002

WHERE MADE: BRISBANE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The appeal be upheld. 2. The orders of Spender J made on 31 May 2002 be set aside. 3. The appeal from the decision of the Registrar of Trade Marks be dismissed. 4. The applicant pay the respondent's costs of the proceedings and the appeal. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.