In opposition proceedings before a Delegate of the Australian Trade Mark Registrar, Jockey International Inc argued registration of THROTTLE JOCKEY should be denied pursuant to s.60 of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth). In particular, it argued that due to the reputation it had acquired in its trade mark JOCKEY® through the mark’s continuous use in Australia since 1947, use of the trade mark THROTTLE JOCKEY was likely to deceive or cause confusion.
In the decision in Jockey International Inc v Darren Wilkinson  ATMO 22 (17 March 2010), the Delegate found that Jockey, the company responsible for the No Ride Up, Almost Nothing and No Panty Line Promise lines of underwear, had the requisite reputation in the JOCKEY trade mark.
Citing the decision in Kimberly-Clark Worldwide Inv v. Goulimis (2008) AIPC 92-307 where use of the trade mark HUGGIE MUMMY was fo
und likely to mislead or cause confusion in light of the Opponent’s reputation in the mark HUGGIES, the Delegate found that when THROTTLE JOCKEY was applied to clothing that deception or confusion with the JOCKEY trade mark was likely to arise.
Jockey failed to establish grounds of opposition pursuant to s.42(b), s.44 and s.62A of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth). However, in opposition proceedings an Opponent must only establish one ground of opposition to be successful.