The Trade Marks Sub-area consists of:

• any trade mark dispute, with respect to validity of a trade mark and/or distinguishing goods and services (including in respect of a letter, number, word, phrase, sound, smell, shape, logo, picture and packaging).
• "geographical indication" disputes involving a geographical indication or order term signifying a related attribute of goods.
• an appeal from a decision of the Registrar of Trade Marks.

The NPA practice note sets out the arrangements for the management of intellectual property proceedings:

Other practice notes which may be relevant to this NPA include:

Filing fees for commencing a proceeding in this Sub-area may apply. Information about Court fees, including the fees payable and circumstances where an exemption or deferral can be given is available in Forms, Fees & Costs or from the Registry.

Parties should consider whether it is necessary to file a Genuine steps statement (Form 16) in certain proceedings in this NPA - see r 8.02 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) and the Civil Dispute Resolution Act 2011 (Cth) (including sections 6, 7 and 16).

1.  Commencing trade marks proceedings

An intellectual property owner can apply to the Court to seek a declaration and a final injunction restraining an infringement under the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth). The Court can order damages or at its election an account of profits.

An application can also be brought by a party who seeks to dispute the validity of the registration of a trade mark.

2. Appeals from the Registrar of Trade Marks

A party who wants to appeal from a decision of the Registrar of Trade Marks must within 21 days of the date of the decision, file a Notice of appeal, which must include:

• the date of the decision
• whether the appeal is from the whole or a part of the decision and if only from a part of the decision, details of the part of the decision
• order(s) sought
• grounds relied on in support of each order sought.

For further procedural and case management information you should refer to the Central Practice Note and the Intellectual Property Practice Note.

• Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth)
• Evidence Act 1995 (Cth)

• 1 Jul 2026: Clarke v TNSG Biotech Co., Ltd [2026] FCA 851
  TRADE MARKS – appeal under s 56 of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) – where respondent did not appear at the hearing – where Registrar of Trade Marks did not wish to be heard – where affidavits filed by the respondent in the proceeding but not read into evidence – appeal allowed
  Judge: STELLIOS J
• 23 Jun 2026: Republic of Peru (Peruvian State) v Registrar of Trade Marks [2026] FCA 791
  TRADE MARKS – section 177 of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) – application for word PISCO to be registered as a certification mark – appeal from a decision of a delegate of the Registrar of the Australian Trade Mark Office – whether certification trade mark sought is inherently adapted to distinguish – whether certification trade mark sought is…
  Judge: BURLEY J
• 16 Jun 2026: Mobile Skips (Australia) Pty Ltd v Registrar of Trade Marks [2026] FCA 744
  TRADE MARKS – appeal under s 35 of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) from decision of delegate of Registrar of Trade Marks refusing registration of plain word mark “MOBILE SKIPS” – plain word mark rejected under s 41 of the Trade Marks Act – whether mark not to any extent inherently adapted to distinguish designated services of the applicant –…
  Judge: HESPE J
• 12 Jun 2026: Universal Music Australia Pty Limited v TPG Internet Pty Ltd (No 2) [2026] FCA 731
  COPYRIGHT – section 115A of the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) – extension of injunction requiring carriage service providers to take reasonable steps to disable access to online locations infringing or facilitating infringement of copyright – removal of domain names that have ceased to enable or facilitate access to online locations – removal of…
  Judge: BURLEY J
• 27 May 2026: On Clouds GmbH v Cyclonic, Inc [2026] FCA 647
  TRADE MARKS – where the Delegate rejected an opposition brought by the appellant – appeal from the Delegate’s decision – where the combined visual similarity, significant aural similarity, and shared association with the idea of a cyclone give rise to a real, tangible risk that some consumers will wonder whether the marks originate from the same…
  Judge: LENEHAN J
• 11 May 2026: Deakin University v Macreadie (Final Orders) [2026] FCA 583
  PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Form of injunctions – where injunctions sought to restrain the making of misleading and deceptive representations – where disputed element of proposed form of injunction is ancillary to other elements and corresponds to relief sought at trial – injunction granted. COSTS – Application for indemnity costs – where applicants…
  Judge: WHEELAHAN J
• 24 Apr 2026: Deakin University v Macreadie [2026] FCA 481
  CONSUMER LAW – application for permanent injunctions pursuant to s 232 of the Australian Consumer Law restraining the respondents from representing that the second respondent is the owner of the relevant intellectual property and trade marks of the Blue Carbon Lab – application for mandatory injunction requiring the second respondent to change its …
  Judge: WHEELAHAN J
• 23 Apr 2026: Care A2 Plus Pty Ltd v The a2 Milk Company Limited (No 2) [2026] FCA 475
  TRADE MARKS – infringement – milk – a2/A2 – A1 beta-casein – A2 beta-casein – a2 Milk – work mark – device marks – Care A2+ – use as a trade mark or badge of origin – substantial identicality – where marks are not substantially identical – deceptive similarity – where marks are deceptively similar – whether impugned mark is composite mark or…
  Judge: ROFE J
• 21 Apr 2026: Australian LinkedIn Pty Ltd v Registrar of Trade Marks [2026] FCA 469
  PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application to dispense with the requirement in rule 4.01(2) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) that a corporation must not proceed in the Court other than by a lawyer – application by director and shareholder to represent the company – where the company does not have the means to retain lawyers – where no evidence of…
  Judge: OWENS J
• 20 Apr 2026: Container Rotation Systems Pty Ltd v Intermodal Solutions (Group) Pty Ltd (No 2) [2026] FCA 473
  PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – form of orders giving effect to substantive reasons delivered in this proceeding COSTS – application for indemnity costs – relevance of conduct of parties – preparation and reliance on extensive material of limited utility – conduct inconsistent with the overarching obligations encompassed in ss 37M and 37N of the Federal…
  Judge: ROFE J