Parke Davis Pty Ltd v Wilkinson Sword Pty Ltd [1981] FCA 260
Federal Court of Australia
Full text
Select any passage to save a personal note with optional tags.
CATCHWORDS
Trade Practices - misleading or deceptive conduct ~ false
representation ~ interlocutory injunction - applicant and
respondent sell"pivoting head razors" and "razor blade
cartridges" in various packs ~- whether the public would be
misled or deceived by stickers affixed to the respondent's
packs into thinking that the respondent's product is the same
as, or, that it came from the same source as the applicant's
product - whether the stickers falsely represent that the
respondent's cartridges have the same performance characteristics,
accessories, uses or benefits as the applicant's cartridges.
Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth.) ss. 52, 53 (c), 80
BETWEEN: PARKE DAVIS PTY. LIMITED AND: WILKINSON SWORD PTY. LTD.
NO. G 183 OF 1981
LOCKHART J.
AT SYDNEY
23 DECEMBER 1981
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA )
)
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY )No. G 183 of 1981
)
GENERAL DIVISION )
BETWEEN: PARKE DAVIS PTY. LIMITED
Applicant
AND: WILKINSON SWORD PTY. LIMITED
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
LOCKHART J.
23 DECEMBER 1981
The parties to this dispute are fighting over razors
and razor blades. Parke Davis Pty. Limited, the applicant, sells
and, since December 1980 has sold, razors and razor blades of
various descriptions including what are called in the trade
"pivoting head razors" and "razor blade cartridges". For
convenience I shall refer to them as razors and cartridges
respectively.
From about March or April 1979 to December 1980
these products were sold by the applicant's predecessor in
business in Australia, Parke Davis and Company, a United States
company which sold its business to the applicant on 31 December
1980.
Certain of the razors and cartridges of the applicant and
its predecessor are and, since about March or April 1979 have been,
sold in packs bearing the brand name"Ultra"in yellow lettering on
a black background. The word"Schick" also appears on the packs
and is the registered trade-mark in Australia of Warner—Lambert
Company in the releyant class of goods. Warner~Lambert
22/2
Company is the ultimate holding company of the applicant and was
incorporated in the United States of America.
The applicant's razors and cartridges are sold from at
least 10,000 reta1rl outlets throughout Australia. They include
supermarkets, pharmacies, variety stores, department stores and
barber shops. The products bearing the name "Ultra" have been
extensively promoted and advertised throughout Australia. More
than $600,000 has been spent by the applicant in promoting and
advertising these products during the twelve months ended 30
October 1981. The "Ultra" razors and cartridges are marketed by
the applicant in three packs. The first pack has the razor
together with some cartridges. The second pack has nine "Ultra"
cartridges without the razor and the third pack has five "Ultra"
cartridges also without the razor. The principal sales of the
"Ultra" products are of the nine and five cartridge packs.
The major competitor of the applicant is Gillette
(Australia) Pty. Limited which sells in Australia razors and
cartridges under the brand name and trade-mark "Contour". The
name "Contour" is most frequently displayed in white lettering
on a background which shades from black to grey. The Gillette
product is sold in a pack containing a "Contour" razor and five
cartridges. A second pack is sold containing ten cartridges and
no razor. A third pack contains five cartridges and no razor.
Razors and cartridges bearing the brand name and trade
mark "Profile" have been sold throughout Australia by Wilkinson
Sword Pty. Limited, the respondent, in competition with the products
of the applicant and Gillette, since about August 1979.
oe-/3
The "Profile" razor and cartridges are sold together in
one pack. Another pack is sold containing five cartridges and no
razor. A third pack includes ten "Profile" cartridges and no
razor. Until early December this year the "Profile" razors and
cartridges were sold in packs bearing the name "Profile" in
white lettering on a black background.
Recently the respondent had printed two types of
stickers, one of which was designed to be placed on the pack
containing both the razor and the cartridges and stating "Ultra
& Contour blades will fit Profile". It also contains the words
"Wilkinson Sword" and the Wilkinson Sword emblem.
"Ultra" and "Profile" are printed on the sticker in
yellow. There is also a yellow band round the outside of the
sticker. The words "& Contour" appear in white, and the words
"blades" and "will fit together" and also the Wilkinson Sword
emblem are in red. The background shades from black to grey.
The sticker has been affixed by representatives of the respondent
in each State of Australia to packs containing the "Profile" razor
and cartridges by arrangement with retailers.
Sometimes the sticker has been placed towards the
top of the pack below a slit designed to enable the pack to be
suspended from a hanger commonly found in supermarkets and shops.
Sometimes the sticker has been fixed towards the bottom of the
pack, poSitioned so as to correspond with the front face of the
cartridge pack.
The second type of sticker is designed to be placed,
and has in fact been placed, over most of the face of the container
22/4
which houses the cartridges on the "Profile" packs sold
independently of the razor itself (both five and ten cartridge
packs) and the words "fits Ultra & Contour razors" appear on the
sticker.
The word "Ultra" appears in yellow print; and yellow
is the background colour towards the upper left-hand corner
of the sticker. It is also the background colour of the bottom
right-hand corner of the sticker. The words "& Contour razors"
appear in white print. There is a red band across both the yellow
corners and the words "Ultra & Contour razors" appear on a
background which shades from black to grey.
The words "Wilkinson Sword" and the Wilkinson Sword
emblem appear in the bottom right~hand corner of the sticker. Any
description of the product and of the packaging and stickers is,
of course, only properly appreciated if they are seen. It is not
clear from the evidence when the respondent first sold the razors anc
cartridges with the stickers placed upon the packs in their new
and present form but it seems that this was early in December
this year.
The Gillette "Contour" razors and cartridges are the
market leaders in the field of pivoting head razors and razor
blade cartridges in Australia. The "Ultra" razors and cartridges
of the applicant come next in market share, gaining an increasing
percentage during 1981. The "Profile" product of the respondent
has a lower market share than that of the applicant and this share
has been declining during 1981.
The respondent has, of course, been aware of its
declining market share and has set out to reverse this decline.
«2 e/f5
The change in the form of packaging to which I have referred is
one method adopted by the respondent to achieve this result.
I do not propose to state the actual percentages of the market
enjoyed by "Contour", "Ultra" and "Profile" as the evidence rests
in this respect primarily upon reports received by the applicants
from marketing research consultants which, in turn, are based upon
surveys of the public. Although these reports were admitted into
evidence without objection, the methodology was not established
in a manner which satisfies me that the reports are reliable.
I do not suggest that the reports are not accurate,
nor do I suggest that the methodology is incorrect or unreliable.
All I say is that at this interlocutory stage of the hearing I
am not satisfied as to the reliability of the reports and do not
propose to rely upon them to any great extent. However, I should
say that if I were to do so, although certain conclusions would
support the applicant, others would favour the respondent.
It is common ground that the three brands of razor and
cartridge ~- "Profile", "Ultra" and "Contour" - are 4unterchangeable
one with the other. In other words, each of the three brands of
cartridge may be used with each of the other brands of razor. A
feature of the "Ultra" cartridge which differs from other
cartridges on the market is what the applicant calls its "push-
clean action". If the "Ultra" cartridge is fitted to a "Profile"
or "Contour" razor the push-clean action works in the same way as
if the cartridge were fitted to an "Ultra" razor. The push-clean
action is a function solely of the cartridge and is independent
of any razor to which it is fitted. The "Profile" cartridge does
.../6
not have this action whether it is fitted to a "Profile", "Ultra"
or "Contour" razor. So it is with the "Contour" cartridge. This
push-clean attribute of the "Ultra" cartridge is stressed in
television commercials for the "Ultra" product.
On 11 December 1981 the applicant commenced proceedings
in this Court seeking injunctions pursuant to s. 80 of the
Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth.) ("the Act") to restrain the responden
essentially from promoting, selling or distributing razors or
cartridges bearing the words "Ultra" or "Ultra & Contour" in the
form appearing on the stickers to which I have referred.
On Monday of this week, 21 December, the applicant
sought interlocutory injunctions. The applicant puts its case on a
twofold basis.
First, it contends that the respondent is contravening
s. 52 of the Act by engaging in conduct that is misleading or
deceptive in that the buying public would think that the "Ultra"
and "Profile" products were produced by the same manufacturer, or
that they came from the same source. This contention is based
primarily on the sticker affixed to the pack containing both razor
and cartridges and is based on the fact that the words "Ultra" and
"Profile" are both in yellow print.
The respondent contends that such evidence as there is
as to the reputation of the applicant, the respondent or Gillette
in any of the products marketed as "Ultra", "Profile" or "Contour"
is not only scant but establishes, if anything, that there is no
established reputation in the mind of the buying public in any of
those names in any relevant sense at all.
«ee/7
As far as the application for interlocutory relief
is concerned, my task is to determine whether the applicant
has made out a sufficient case for such relief and, if it has,
to turn to the question of balance of convenience, although
those two questions can, of course, be related. It is not the
function of the Court at this stage to decide the issues which
will arise on a final hearing. In hearing an application for
interlocutory injunctive relief:-
" ...the court does not undertake a
preliminary trial and give or withhold
interlocutory relief upon a forecast
as to the ultimate result of the case,
It looks to see whether the applicant
for the injunction has made out a prima
facie case, in the sense that if the
evidence remains as it is, there is a
probability that at the trial of the action,
the applicant will be held entitled to
relief (Beecham Group Limited v. Bristol
Laboratories Pty. Limited (1968) 118 C.L.R.
618; 1968 A.L.R. 469). I have already
stated my views on the nature of the case which
has to be made out to meet this test (see
World Series Cricket Pty. Limited v. Parish
(1977) A.T.P.R. 40-040; 16(1977) A.L.R. 181
at pp. 185-186 and Commercial Bank of
Australia Limited Limited v. Insurance Brokers
Association of Australia (1977) A.T.P.R.
40-053; (1977) 16 A.L.R. 161 at p. 168).
L adhere to what I have previously said and
will refrain from repeating it."
Per Bowen C.J. in Transport Workers" Union of Australia and Others
v. Leon Laidely Pty. Limited (1980) A.T.P.R. 40-149 at pp.
42,141 and 42,142; also (1980) 28 A.L.R. 589 at p. 593.
Accordingly, any findings of fact that I may make are
made with those principles in mind and certainly not as an
ultimate or final finding of fact when at this stage the evidence
is only in its infancy.
«+ -/8
It is not disputed that the respondent adopted the two
new forms of sticker for the purpose of emphasising that the
"Profile" cartridge will fit the "Ultra" and "Contour" razors
and that the "Ultra" and "Contour" cartridges will fit the
"Profile" razor. Indeed, the choice of the colour yellow and
the adoption of the same form of printing of the word "Ultra"
as appears on the applicant's own pack were designed by the
respondent for the purpose of drawing the buyer's attention to
the interchangeability of the two products in the sense I have
mentioned; similarly as to "Contour" razors and cartridges.
The word "Contour" is printed on the respondent's
stickers in white on a background which is black merging to grey
similar to the "Contour" pack itself. There is one important
difference, however, namely that the letter "C" in "Contour"
on the "Contour" pack is in a rather distinctive form which 1s not
adopted on the respondent's stickers. The evidence suggests that
this was done deliberately so as not to offend Gillette's trade
mark in the word "Contour". There is no registered trade mark of
the applicant in the word "Ultra".
As to the sticker which appears on the ten and five
cartridge "Profile" packs, although the sticker does not mention
the word "Profile" itself, it nevertheless emphasises when it is
read as part of the pack as a whole that the "Profile" (printed on
the pack in large letters and in white) cartridge fits the "Ultra"
and "Contour" razors.
In my opinion no prima facie case has been made out by
the applicant in the requisite sense. I do not think that the
22/9
buying public would be misled or deceived or would be likely to
be misled or deceived into believing that the "Profile" product
is the same as the "Ultra" product or that they come from the same
source. The stickers to my mind emphasise, whether the product
be "Ultra", or "Contour" that those blades will fit the "Profile"
razor, and that the "Profile" cartridge will fit the "Ultra" and
"Contour" razors. The very statement as to interchangeability,
when coupled with the adoption of the word "Ultra" in the same
large printing and yellow colour as on the "Ultra" pack and the
word "Contour" in white on a black to grey background (although
the "C" on the stickers is different from the "C" on the "Contour"
pack )emphasises that the buyer's mind will be drawn to the fact
that the three products are probably separate each from the other.
I have some reservations about the sticker used on the
"Profile" pack containing both razor and cartridges where the
word "Profile" appears in yellow print together with the word
"Ultra"™.
The combination of the word "Ultra"in yellow lettering
on a black background in the relevant market for the sale of razors
and cartridges in Australia has, until this month, been adopted
exclusively by the applicant. The explanation for this change
by the respondent was given by Mr. Gibbons, sales and marketing
manager of the consumer products division of Wilkinson Sword
Group Australia Limited, who was responsible for the supervision
of all sales representatives employed by the respondent and for all
its advertising and promotional materzral. He said that it was
deliberately intended to use the word "Ultra" in a yellow colour
so aS to be as close as possible to the format on the "Ultra"
.../10
-10~
product for the purpose of emphasising the interchangeability of
the two products, "Ultra" and "Profile". He said it was the
graphics department of the respondent that chose or suggested the
use of the yellow colour for the word "Profile" because as
"Ultra" was in the top left-hand corner of the sticker and "Profile"
was in the lower section, one balanced the other as did the word
"blades" in red balance the words "will fit" also in red in
diagonally opposite corners.
The relevance of the reason for the respondent adopting
this course may be open to question. All I wish to say at the
moment is that I have some difficulty with the explanation proffered
by Mr. Gibbons in the absence of corroboration because the
evidence is at too early a stage for questions of credibility to
be determined unless they are central to the case of either the
applicant or the respondent, which they are not. Notwithstanding
my reservations about this aspect of the matter, in my opinion no
prima facie case has been established.
Thus far I have dealt with the first basis on which the
applicant puts its case. The second basis upon which the applicant
puts its case at this stage is that the respondent is infringing s.
53 (c) of the Act in that it is said to be falsely representing
that the "Profile" products have performance characteristics,
accessories, uses or benefits they do not have by representing on
the sticker which is placed on the ten and five cartridge packs
that the "Profile" cartridges fit the "Ultra" razors, in that the
buyer would assume that the "Profile" cartridge has the same
advantage and benefit as the "Ultra" cartridge, namely the push-
clean feature. In my opinion a prima facie case has not been made
out in relation to this complaint.
ee -/11
-ll-
The evidence before me at this stage of the case suggests
that it is more likely that a buyer would simply assume that
the "Profile" cartridge is a razor blade cartridge which fits the
"Ultra" pivoting head razor. He would not assume that the "Profile"
cartridge had the characteristic of push-clean. Furthermore, the
evidence suggests that only a very small section of the public has
ever heard of any push-clean characteristic and that only a small
section of that section associates this characteristic with the
"Ultra" product itself.
What the applicant is seeking to do is in substance to
restrain the respondent from doing the very thing which the applicant
itself does, namely attribute to its own cartridges a feature that it
also fits the razors of its principal competitors. The applicant
states on its packs of nine and five cartridges that the "Ultra"
cartridge "FITS CONTOUR, PROFILE & GII RAZORS". "GII" is another
trade mark of Gillette.
No prima facie case has, in my view, been established, In
all the circumstances it is unnecessary to turn to the balance of
convenience. The respondent has indicated that it is prepared
to give the appropriate undertaking to the Court to keep relevant
records of the numbers of stickers affixed to "Profile" packs.
This case ought to be brought on for final hearing as
soon as practicable, Although I do not intend to grant
interlocutory relief, I propose to stand the matter down until a
little later this morning so that the respondent may formulate with
precision an appropriate undertaking as to the keeping of records
of stickers prepared and affixed to packs and so that the parties
may bring in short minutes as to the future conduct of the proceedings
including matters such as pleadings, discovery and interrogatories.
226/12
-12-
The order of the Court is that interlocutory relief
is refused. The costs of the applicant will be costs in the
proceedings.
I note the undertaking of the respondent by its
counsel to the Court that it will, until the hearing of this
proceeding or further order, keep proper records of the numbers
of stickers the subject of these proceedings distributed by it
to retailers or affixed by them to packs whether before or after
distribution and to separate the figures between the two types
of stickers, the two types of stickers being those appearing on
exhibits "GVG 9" and "GVG 10".
I give the following directions:
1. That the applicant file and serve a statement of
claim on or before 6 January 1982;
2. That the respondent file and serve its defence on
or before 27 January 1982;
3. That the parties administer any interrogatories
on or before 4 February 1982;
4. That any such interrogatories be answered on or
before 17 February 1982;
5. That the evidence on the final hearing be
primarily by affidavit subject of course to cross-examination;
6. That the applicant file and serve all affidavits
intended to be relied upon on or before 24 February 1982;
7. That the respondent file and serve all affidavits
intended to be relied upon on or before 9 March 1982;
8. That the proceedings stand over for further
directions to 12 March 1982;
+--/13
-13-
9. Each party has liberty to apply in the meantime
on two days' notice.
The exhibits may be handed out. Any documents
produced on subpoena may be returned whence they came.
| certify that this and the -hweblve (12)
preceding pazes zre a t-us copy cf the
Reasons for Judgment here:n cof his Honour
Mr Justico Lochnart.
Associaie
Dated. 2% DECEmBEG. ITS1
we