The below are examples of invalid series, because the trade marks do not resemble each other in material particulars. The differences are such that they affect the identity of the trade marks when each member of the series is compared to each of the others.

7.2 Examples of trade marks that differ in ways other than those allowed in paragraphs 51(1)(a), (b) or (c)

Although all of the below trade marks may resemble each other in material particulars, the ways in which they differ are not specified in paragraph 51(1)(a),(b) or (c).

51(1) (a) The following are examples of invalid series containing differences that do not qualify under paragraph 51(1)(a) as statements or representations as to the goods or services in relation to which the trade marks are to be used.

Trade marks

Comments

Example 1

IDAK ACCOUNTING
IDAK MEDICAL

Class 35: Accounting

Examples 1 and 2 include words that do not indicate the goods/services in relation to which the trade marks are to be used - MEDICAL and REPAIRS

Example 2

IDAK REPAIRS
IDAK REFRIGERATORS

Class 11: Refrigerators

51(1) (b) The following are examples of invalid series containing differences that do not qualify under paragraph 51(1)(b) as statements or representations as to number, price, quality or names of places.

		Trade marks	Comments
Number	Example 1	IDAK 2 IDAK TWICE	TWICE is not a statement or representation as to number, ie. it does not include a number (TWO or 2) per se.
Number	Example 2	IDAK 6 pack IDAK Unlimited	UNLIMITED is not a statement or representation as to number.
Price	Example 3	IDAK £ IDAK $ IDAK ¥	The symbols refer to currency rather than price.
Quality	Example 4	IDAK DELUXE IDAK BEGINNING	BEGINNING is not a statement or representation as to quality.
Quality	Example 5	Class 30: Tea/coffee IDAK PREMIUM IDAK WEATHER PROOF	WEATHER PROOF is not a statement or representation as to quality in relation to tea/coffee
Names of Places	Example 6	IDAK MELBOURNE IDAK EAST	East is not the name of a place
Names of Places	Example 7	IDAK GOLD COAST IDAK REGIONAL	Regional is not the name of a place

51(1)(c) The following are examples of invalid series containing differences that do not qualify under paragraph 51(1)(c) as the colour of any part of the trade mark

Trade marks

Comments

Example

IDAK BLUE;
IDAK RED

Class 45: pet-sitting services

The words RED and BLUE here are not the colour of any part of the trade mark. They are also not statement as to the services, which are not ordinarily described in terms of colour

7.3 Trade marks which resemble each other in material particulars, and differ in one or more of the ways specified in paragraphs 51(1)(a),(b) or (c), but incorporate a further change that renders them an invalid series.

Trade marks

Difference that is not allowed

Example 1

IDAK 1
IDAKS 2

Differences in spelling

Example 2

IDAK CLOTHING
idak FOOTWEAR

Use of upper and lower case letters

Example 3

IDAK 1
IDAK 2

Underline

Example 4

IDAK $2.00
IDAC $10.00

Differences in spelling

Example 5

IDAK STANDARD
I DAK DELUXE

Separation of word

Amended Reasons

Amended Reason	Date Amended
Whole part reviewed and content updated, including examples.	03 Jun 2026
Accessibility fix – alternative text for images	31 Oct 2025
Invalid series examples updated.	29 Mar 2023
Examples of trade marks that do not meet the provisions - Example added.	29 Mar 2023
Update hyperlinks	20 Apr 2022
	07 Nov 2021

	Trade marks
Example 1	IDAK MELBOURNE IDAK SYDNEY The large difference in the relative size of the words in each trade mark significantly changes the prominence of the shared IDAK, as well as the overall visual impression.
Example 2	Class 25: Clothing. Firstly, GALAXY is not a “name of a place”, and therefore is not a section 51(1)(b) statement. Moreover, GALAXY is distinctive on clothing (it has no ordinary descriptive relevance, unlike MELBOURNE), and is a visually prominent part of the mark (being larger than IDAK). As a result, it is likely to be taken as an identifying feature.
Example 3	SYDNEY CLOTHING; MELBOURNE CLOTHING Class 25: Clothing. The trade marks differ only by a statement as to “names of places” (s 51(1)(b)). However, the shared word CLOTHING is purely descriptive of the claimed goods, and is at the end of two purely descriptive phrases. CLOTHING is not likely to be taken by consumers as an identifying feature of these trade marks. Therefore, they do not resemble each other in material particulars.