Most Recent
The manufacturer of the popular 1000Hour Lash & Brow Dye has accused “luxe-for-less” cosmetics company MCoBeauty of infringing its trade mark with its new 2000 Hour Lash & Brow Tint and misrepresenting to consumers that the product lasts twice as long.
In a victory for Tradie briefs manufacturer Sojo, a delegate has shot down clothing start-up Rebel Power's bid to trade mark the words 'shit hot tradie'.
US singer Katy Perry can withdraw an admission in a trade mark infringement case that licensing her brand to Target and Myer constituted use, with a judge finding the admission was “not consistent with current law”.
Sportswear brand Puma has launched an appeal against a Federal Court decision that found it’s ‘Procat’ trade mark was deceptively similar to US machinery manufacturer Caterpillar’s CAT marks.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission is investigating competition concerns about Apple’s refusal to allow third party access to the near-field communication chip that allows iPhone users to make 'tap and go' payments through Apple Pay.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has accepted a court-enforceable undertaking from designer tapware supplier Nero Bathrooms following revelations the company likely engaged in resale price maintenance.
Men's briefs manufacturer Tradie has resolved a case brought by a rival alleging it misled consumers by claiming its underpants were the 'Aussiest undies ever'.
The makers of Finish dishwashing products has secured an injunction keeping rival Somat products branded with an allegedly infringing logo from supermarket shelves until the Federal Court decides a high-stakes trade mark battle.
An urgent injunction sought by the makers of Finish dishwashing products to remove Henkel Australia’s flagship product from supermarket shelves could derail the launch of Somat-branded products in Australia, a court has heard.
US machinery manufacturer Caterpillar has won its appeal of a decision approving sportswear brand Puma’s 'Procat' trade mark application, with a judge finding “a significant number” of consumers might be confused by the mark.