Tag: Currently browsing "Glenn Oaks"

Blake Dawson - “Glenn oaks” bourbon not likely to mislead or deceive

Elizabeth Ireland and Lisa Ritson of Blake Dawson report on Scotch Whisky Association v De Witt [2007] FCA 1649, in which the Federal Court has upheld a decision of the Trade Marks Office that the use of the mark “Glenn Oaks” in relation to a bourbon product was not likely to confuse, deceive or mislead consumers to think the product was of Scottish origin, or was a whisky, not a bourbon. In reaching the decision, the Court examined market differentiation between bourbon and whisky products, and consumer habits in relation to both products. Whilst the mark was accepted for registration, the Court modified the class of goods for which the mark could be used to explicitly exclude products labelled as “whisky”.

Scotch Whiskey was refused leave to appeal the decision in Scotch Whiskey Association v De Witt [2008] FCA 73 on 14 February 2008.

Blake Dawson - “Glenn oaks” bourbon not likely to mislead or deceive



Baker & McKenzie - Scotch Whisky Association objects to geographic connotation in trade mark

Baker & McKenzie reports on a Federal Court decision in which the Scotch Whisky Association alleged that the mark “Glenn Oaks” was misleading when used in relation to bourbon as the word “Glenn” conveyed a clear connotation of Scottish origin.

According to Baker & McKenzie, it was also argued that “Glenn Oaks” was deceptively similar to trade marks that had acquired a reputation in Australia for scotch whisky such as “Glenfiddich”, “Glenlivet” and “Glenmorangie”.

Baker & McKenzie note that despite both arguments being rejected on the facts, this case highlights that a mark may be perceived as having geographical significance without being the name of an actual place. The possibility of this sort of objection should be kept in mind when deciding on product names.

Scotch Whisky Association objects to geographic connotation in trade mark


About this entry