Luke Merrick

Buy now, pay later company Zip Co offered $4 million to settle a lawsuit by mortgage provider Firstmac alleging infringement of its ‘Zip’ trade mark which it ultimately defeated.

Buy now, pay later giant Zip Co has successfully defended a lawsuit over its use of Firstmac’s ‘Zip’ trade mark and won its bid to have the mortgage provider’s mark removed for non-use.

An appeals court has said that while it might be desirable for law firms to disclose their involvement in drafting expert reports, they are not legally obligated to do so, overturning a finding that Corrs Chambers Westgarth went “far beyond the permissible scope” of involvement in a report prepared for a trade secrets case.

A consortium of parmigiano reggiano producers has lost its opposition to registration of a parmesan trade mark in Australia by an international group dedicated to protecting common names from being monopolised.

The Indian government has lost a bid to register a trade mark for the word ‘Basmati’, after an IP Australia delegate found rice growers outside of India had an “equally valid claim” to use the term.

A consortium of parmigiano reggiano producers who claim Kraft Foods’ ‘Kraft parmesan cheese’ trade will lead customers to believe the food giant’s cheese is made in Italy have taken their fight to the Federal Court.

A consortium of parmigiano reggiano producers has lost its challenge to Kraft Foods’ ‘Kraft parmesan cheese’ trade mark after an IP Australia delegate found that customers would be “sceptical” that the product was Italian.

Puma has failed in its bid for leave to appeal a decision that found its ‘Procat’ trade mark was deceptively similar to US machinery manufacturer Caterpillar’s CAT marks.

A client of Corrs Chambers Westgarth has filed an appeal after a judge found the firm went “far beyond the permissible scope” of involvement in an expert report prepared for a trade secrets case.

The conduct of Corrs Chambers Westgarth in the preparation of an ostensibly independent expert report in a trade secrets case “must not be repeated”, a judge has said, throwing out the expert’s evidence as potentially tainted by the law firm’s involvement.