Avida wins appeal
New Avida name to continue, despite NSW motorhome manufacturer regaining right to use Winnebago name in AustraliaWinnebago Australia has won back the right to use the Winnebago name Down Under, after winning an appeal against a 2012 Federal Court decision that ordered the cancellation of the Winnebago trademark in Australia.
The win means that Avida Motorhomes, the new name of Winnebago Australia since February, will be able to continue to use the tagline “Maker of the Australian Winnebago” beyond the September 2013 deadline specified in the original court decision.
The appeal was heard on March 26, with the decision delivered on June 7 before three judges of the Federal Court.
“It was unanimous, they came down with a decision that we could continue to use the name,” said Avida sales and marketing manager, Max Mayo.
“There are still some minor issues to resolve, one being costs, another being do we have to use a disclaimer... but in essence, the bottom line is we can continue to use the Winnebago name after the September date when we previously had to hand it back.”
Mayo said there would be no return to the Winnebago name, except perhaps for a new, larger, range-topping model.
“It’s not out of the question that we can launch a new model, maybe a bigger one, that can be a Winnebago, but at the moment the plans are we are going full steam ahead with Avida and we are branching out with caravans,” he said.
Mayo said Avida should have its first caravan prototype completed in the next few weeks, with the plan to unveil the new Avida caravan to the public later this year, possibly as early as the Penrith Caravan, Camping & Holiday Expo, in early-September.
The appeal was the latest round in a legal tussle with Iowa-based Winnebago Industries, which has been manufacturing motorhomes in the US since 1966. The iconic American company won a court battle last year against local manufacturers and dealers using their brand name.
Mayo said although it’s possible the US company could take it further to the High Court, he believes the three-year ordeal “has just about run its race”.
“Whether a squabble over a name is a good enough reason to go the High Court, I don’t know... I guess we’ll know in the not too distant future what they decide to do.”
Please see our Editorial Guidelines & Code of Ethics (including for more information about sponsored content and paid events). The information published on this website is of a general nature only and doesn’t consider your particular circumstances or needs.
