Abstract
The concept of ‘substantial identity’ has not been the subject of sustained critical inquiry in Australian trade mark law, notwithstanding that it plays a crucial role in relation to trade mark ownership, non-use, amendments to representations, and the criminal offences. The first part of this two-part article reveals, through novel doctrinal analysis, how over the course of the twentieth century a settled, strict interpretation of substantial identity took shape in Australian trade mark law. This orthodox interpretation was recently disrupted by the Full Court of the Federal Court in Accor Australia & New Zealand Hospitality Pty Ltd v Liv Pty Ltd and Pham Global Pty Ltd v Insight Clinical Imaging Pty Ltd. In these decisions the Court reinterpreted earlier High Court authority to set up a new, significantly more expansive test of substantial identity – one that is already starting to have a major, and concerning, impact throughout Australia’s trade marks system.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
