Tim O’Callaghan

Expertise

Recognition

‘Tim O’Callaghan is very experienced. He returns calls promptly and is commercial in his approach.’
The Legal 500 Asia-Pacific: Intellectual Property, 2023 edition – Testimonials

‘Tim O’Callaghan is highly personable and responsive. He brings a fresh perspective in delivery of services in the brand protection space’
The Legal 500 Asia-Pacific: Intellectual Property, 2023 edition – Testimonials

“Tim O’Callaghan excels at devising and implementing astute branding strategies, and deploys this tactical nous to great effect in the courtroom as well.”
World Trademark Review 2017

“Piper Alderman’s whip-smart prosecution pro Tim O’Callaghan completes projects on budget on and on time.”
World Trademark Review 2018

Accolades

• Best Lawyers in Australia – Recognised for Intellectual Property Law (Adelaide, AU) – Since 2014 edition
• The Legal 500 Asia-Pacific – Recommended for Intellectual Property – since 2013 edition
• Doyle’s Guide – Leading Intellectual Property Lawyers – South Australia, since 2015 edition
• Doyle’s Guide – Leading Technology, Media & Telecommunication Lawyers – South Australia, since 2015 edition
• Lawyers Weekly Australian Law Awards – Finalist for Intellectual Property Team of the Year – 2016

Recent deals and media coverage

• Young lawyers learn the ropes for SA emerging industries – InDaily, 7 December 2021

Memberships

• Chair, Hutt St Centre
• Intellectual Property Society of Australia and New Zealand
• Licensing Executives Society
• Institute of Patent and Trade Marks Attorneys of Australia
• Former Vice-Chairman, Defence Teaming Centre Inc.
• University of Adelaide and Law School Advisory Board

Related Insights

• Is it Obvious? Sandoz v Bayer and a Patent’s Inventive Step
• New Trade Mark? Do Your Due Diligence – Hemmes v Establishment 203
• FanFirm Pty Ltd v Fanatics, LLC – Defences under the Trade Marks Act
• Glass Hardware v TCT Group: Patents all hinge on sufficient disclosure
• Trade Mark Protection and the Australian Border Force
• Defences to Copyright Infringement – What is a “Service for the Commonwealth or State”?
• Case Update: The trade mark ‘7NOW’ and the importance of using your Registered Trade Mark
• Safeguarding Australia’s Military Secrets Act – Implications for defence industry
• Native Extracts v Plant Extracts: essential elements of confidential information claims
• Defence Industry Development Strategy – Procurement Reform
• Key Takeaways: Defence & Space Masterclass | Navigating the Defence Procurement Frontier – Strategies for Success
• Chou v Metstech Pty Limited – Copyright Identification
• Agency Group Australia Ltd v H.A.S. Real Estate Pty Ltd – Limitations of Enforcing Composite Trade Marks
• Key Takeaways | NFP Industry Boardroom Lunch
• BIG MAC v BIG JACK: Burger battles over trade mark registrations
• The Australian Naval Nuclear Power Safety Bill 2023 (Cth) – pathway to naval nuclear safety in Australia
• Cantarella Bros Pty Ltd v Lavazza Australia Pty Ltd – How to determine “ordinary signification”
• The trade mark ‘7NOW’ and the importance of using your Registered Trade Mark
• Intellectual Property and Wind Energy
• The US AUKUS Undersea Act, ITAR & Transfer of US Nuclear Submarines to Australia
• AUKUS, ITAR, Export Control Reform and the Australian Defence Industry
• Doing Business in Australia Guide
• Reputation in a Registered Trade Mark not a factor for Deceptive Similarity: Self Care IP Holdings Pty Ltd v Allergan Australia Pty Ltd
• AUKUS – The Nuclear Submarines and the Defence Industry
• Why register your trade marks? Lessons from the Battle of the Beers
• The Pokémon Company International, Inc v Pokemon Pty Ltd [2022] FCA 1561: The importance of an intellectual property protection strategy
• Export Administration Regulations (EAR) – Fundamentals & Practice
• Intellectual Property & Australian Sanctions against Russia
• ITAR 101 – Fundamentals and Practice
• Commissioner of Patents v Thaler [2022] FCAFC 62 – AI as an Inventor?
• ACCC sues Facebook for Scam Advertisements
• .au Domain Registrations Available from 24 March 2022
• Intellectual Property & Technology: 2021 Year in Review
• Crackdown on keyboard warriors? – the Government consults in response to Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd v Voller (2021) 392 ALR 540
• Allergan v Self Care IP Holdings: PROTOX – Not such an alternative
• AGL Energy Limited v Greenpeace Australia Pacific Limited [2021] FCA 625 – Fair dealing, parody or satire and potential pitfalls
• Ready for lift off? – General Obligations and Liabilities under the Space (Launches and Returns) Act 2018
• Australian industry capability in the spotlight
• Smart Contracts: Don’t kill all the lawyers, just yet…
• Voller and Defamatory Facebook Comments: Are businesses liable for third party comments?
• IPT Alert: Register your trade mark with Chinese Customs
• Trade Mark Registration – Why should you register your trade marks?

Related News

• Intellectual Property & Technology South Australia: 2023 Year in Review
• Intellectual Property & Technology: 2023 Year in Review
• Restructuring & Insolvency: 2023 Year in Review
• Piper Alderman’s EOY Client Update & Season’s Greetings
• Intellectual Property & Technology South Australia: 2022 Year in Review
• Intellectual Property & Technology: 2022 Year in Review
• Restructuring & Insolvency: 2022 Year in Review
• Piper Alderman bolsters restructuring and insolvency practice in Sydney
• Piper Alderman advises Normet Group Oy on acquisition of Garock
• The Legal 500 Asia Pacific: Australia, 2022 edition
• The Best Lawyers in Australia, 2021 edition
• The Legal 500 Asia Pacific: Australia, 2020 edition
• Lexology Getting the Deal Through – Fintech Australia, 2019 Edition
• The Best Lawyers in Australia, 2020 edition
• The Legal 500 Asia Pacific: Australia, 2019 edition
• The Best Lawyers in Australia, 2019 edition
• The Legal 500 Asia Pacific: Australia, 2018 edition
• The Best Lawyers in Australia, 2018 edition
• The Legal 500 Asia Pacific: Australia, 2017 edition
• Piper Alderman announces new senior leadership appointments and promotions