Descriptive Wine Labels Fall Short – BIN 2 and BIN 8 Refused Registration

Category: , Intellectual Property, Technology & Data
Date: 09 April 2025
Author: Tyrone Walker - Genuine People
A recent trade mark opposition highlights the challenges of registering descriptive terms in the wine industry. In' Endeavour Group Ltd v Southcorp Brands Pty Ltd [2023] ATMO 127, the Delegate of the Registrar of Trade Marks refused registration of two trade marks '€“' BIN 2' and' BIN 8' '€“ applied for by Southcorp Brands Pty Ltd (a subsidiary of Treasury Wine Estates) in relation to wine products. The trade marks were opposed by Endeavour Group Ltd on the basis that the terms were not capable of distinguishing Southcorp's goods and were commonly used across the wine industry.

What Are BIN 2 and BIN 8?

BIN numbers have long been used in winemaking to refer to specific bottlings or storage locations. Treasury's "Penfolds" brand has historically used such designations (e.g. BIN 28, BIN 389) to identify various wines in its range. However, Southcorp sought to register the numbers' 2' and' 8' specifically in combination with "BIN".

Why Was Registration Refused?

The Delegate found that:
  • The terms' BIN 2 and' BIN 8' are' not inherently adapted to distinguish' wine products because they follow a well-known descriptive format used across the industry.
  • The word "BIN" is widely understood to mean a bottling or blend, and single-digit numbers are a logical and commonplace way to differentiate products.
  • The evidence submitted by Southcorp did not show that' consumers associate BIN 2 or BIN 8 alone with Southcorp'€”rather, recognition came from their association with the' Penfolds brand, which appeared prominently on all labels.
  • While Southcorp presented evidence of sales, advertising, and use, it was found insufficient to establish' acquired distinctiveness under the' Trade Marks Act

The Result

Both applications were refused. Endeavour Group was awarded costs for both oppositions.

Key Takeaways for Brand Owners

  • Descriptive or industry-generic terms remain difficult to register unless supported by strong, standalone evidence of distinctiveness.
  • Use alongside a strong house brand (like Penfolds) may undermine arguments that a sub-brand or number is independently distinctive.
  • Where descriptive terms are used, businesses should consider securing distinctive stylization, logos, or composite marks instead.
If you have questions about brand protection strategies or opposition proceedings, our IP team is here to help.