Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 19 MARCH 2026

Composite Trade Marks: Are they F[y]re-Proof?

Piper Alderman
Piper Alderman
Contributor
Piper Alderman

Piper Alderman

Helping shape the future of business in Australia with practical, commercial and cutting-edge legal...

View firm profile
Explore more from Piper Alderman

This decision serves as a reminder that a registered mark may be used "within" a composite mark, and this can, in certain circumstances, still constitute "use" for the purposes of defeating removal application for non-use.

AustraliaIntellectual Property

In Trafalgar Group Pty Ltd v Boss Fire & Safety Pty Ltd,1 the Federal Court explained the operation of a "mark within a mark", holding that Trafalgar's use of the FYRE Device Mark within its various composite marks sufficed in evidencing use as a separate operative trade mark during the alleged non‑use period.

Background

On 7 August 2009, the appellant, Trafalgar Group Pty Ltd (Trafalgar) applied to register Australian Trade Mark No. 1313971:

1761436a.jpeg

(FYRE Device Mark).2

The trade mark was accepted for registration on 2 November 2009 and entered onto the Register of Trade Marks on 18 March 2010, making Trafalgar the registered owner of the Fyre Device Mark.3

The Respondent, Boss Fire & Safety Pty Ltd (Boss Fire), filed a non-use removal application under on 22 February 2019 pursuant to section 92(4)(b) of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) (TMA), alleging that Trafalgar Group had not used the FYRE Device Mark with respect to the registered goods for a continuous three-year period between

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from