D’Aquino Bros accused of violating trademark laws by selling fake "Scotch" in Australia
The Scotch Whisky Association (SWA) has accused D’Aquino Bros Party Ltd. and seven related parties of breaching Australian and international trademark laws by selling liquor improperly labelled as "Scotch" in Australia.
The legal requirements regarding the making of Scotch are strict. One of the requirements is that the product must originate in Scotland.
If the Federal Court of Australia finds that D’Aquino’s products fail to meet the requisite standards, it may issue an injunction preventing D’Aquino from selling products labelled “Scotch” and “Scotch whisky” in Australia. The SWA is also seeking damages for “acts of trademark infringement” and “flagrant” conduct causing consumers to be deceived.
The claims were brought following an investigation by ABC which found that D’Aquino’s brand “The Black Scot” lacked the chemical compounds of a true Scotch and thus was not made in Scotland, as advertised. Two other brands by D’Aquino, “The Clansmen” and “J.B.R Scotch Whisky”, have also been named as part of the suit.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission and the NSW Food Authority are also investigating the authenticity of D’Aquino’s tequila products, pursuant to an ABC report finding that the tequila was not made in Mexico, as required.
Author: Daniela Cerrone, 2018 Summer Student-at-law
Photo Credit: https://unsplash.com/@dreadspecialist
Expertise
Insights
-
Intellectual Property Litigation
Trademarks Opposition Board Moves to Digital-Only Submission of Confidential Information
As of June 1, 2026, the Trademarks Opposition Board (TMOB) requires all confidential evidence and documentation in proceedings under sections 11.13, 38, or 45 of the Trademarks Act (the “Act”) to be… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Kansas City Chiefs Stars Sued for Trademark Infringement Over Steakhouse
The sneaker company, 1587 Sneakers, is reportedly suing Kansas City Chiefs players, Patrick Mahomes and Travis Kelce, along with their restaurant partners, for trademark infringement.1587 Sneakers… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
A Pecking Order Problem: Pudgy Penguins Faces Penguin Trademark Lawsuit
As reported by Bloomberg Law News, PEI Licensing (“PEI”), the owner of the Penguin apparel brand, has sued Pudgy Penguins NFT (“Pudgy Penguins”) for trademark infringement.Pudgy Penguins started as a… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Old Brand, New Problems? Nike’s Attempt to Revive “Total 90” Soccer Cleats
Nike is reportedly attempting to revive its classic “Total 90” soccer cleat line, but has encountered an unexpected setback. Total90, LLC has reportedly asserted that Nike is infringing its… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
A Swing and a Miss: The “All Rise” Trademark Attempt
As reported by Bloomberg, attempts to register marks covering the phrases “All Rise” and “Here Comes the Judge” were rejected by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In… -
Intellectual Property Litigation
Hershey’s Kisses Go to Court – Federal Court of Appeal Decision in PIM Brands Inc. v. Hershey Chocolate & Confectionery LLC
The Federal Court of Appeal’s recent decision in Promotion in Motion, Inc. (PIM Brands, Inc.) v. Hershey Chocolate & Confectionery LLC offers fresh guidance on how courts evaluate survey evidence…