Court applies the principles governing passing off and the test for the notional average purchaser who must be considered when determining likelihood of…
Applied for the principle that where the sense of one word mark differs markedly from another, the scope for deception or confusion is reduced, and visual…
Cited to illustrate the excessive volume of papers in trade mark disputes.
Cited for the principle that use of different names does not necessarily exclude the probability of deception.
Cited for the proposition that section 34(1)(c) protects the commercial value attached to the reputation of a trade mark, rather than its capacity to…
Court cites this case's observation that passing off might have been a better horse to ride than trade mark infringement, and later applies this case's caution…
Court cites this case at paras 8 and 9 for examples of actual confusion in the market, including a misled customer and mix-up of products on shelves.
The principle that a word mark is recognizable as a whole and for what it conveys is applied to determine that visual distinctions and different meanings…
Applied for the test that judges must explain their impression on likelihood of deception or confusion and avoid undue scrutiny for similarities and…