The applicant applied to register its trade marks WELLANATION CLINICS and WELLANATION. Both trade marks were rejected under section 41, on the grounds that neither had the required capacity to distinguish.
The Examiner’s objection was that both trade marks “indicted the term is used to describe the desired outcome of the use of health, wellbeing and beauty products and services”. The Examiner’s comment was based on Internet research, however, at the Hearing, the applicant noted that all but five of the examples were direct references to the applicant and the remaining references were not related to Australia.
The Hearing Officer found that “the trade marks lack direct meaning and are sufficiently adapted to distinguish”.
Of the Internet research, the Hearing Officer noted that there was nothing to indicate that the trade marks were in common use in Australia, or indeed had any real meaning in Australia.
The applications were accepted for registration.
To view the Office decision, click here.
This article is an extract from Spruson & Ferguson’s monthly summary of Australian Trade Mark Office decisions. You can view the entire month’s summary here.
Litigation Team, Trade Marks Team
Trade Marks Team