Sharetea Australia secures trademark rights after dispute dismissed

Sharetea Australia trademark rights
Anthony Mu and lawyer James Lawrence outside the Sydney Law Courts. (Source: LinkedIn)

Bubble tea chain Sharetea Australia has secured exclusive rights to indefinitely use and sub-licence the Sharetea name in Australia, after a long-running trademark dispute came to an end.

The Federal Court dismissed the case brought by international franchisor Lian Fa International Dining Business after insisting on mediation between the two parties.

The case was launched in 2021 when Lian Fa terminated the master franchise agreement and alleged trademark breaches, misleading conduct and unlawful use of confidential information, reports Lawyerly.

Sharetea Australia continued to operate the business, claiming the termination was not valid.

The case has been beset by delays, with five adjournments prior to the 1 July dismissal.

Sharetea Australia GM Anthony Mu shared the news on LinkedIn.

Sharetea Australia opens 125th store

“This achievement is not only a big moment for Sharetea Australia but also for Australian retail as it related to over 125 Sharetea stores in Australia and over 1,000 Sharetea Australian employees,” he said.

“Sharetea Australia has vigorously defended the matter for many years,” he said.

“What’s even more impressive is that we have kept growing our business over this past 2.5 years despite these difficult circumstances.

“Having just achieved our 125th store opening we’re looking forward to reaching 150 stores – I’m excited about the future of Sharetea Australia!” he said.

According to the Brisbane Times, Sharetea Australia is still in separate disputes over a variety of issues with a number of its franchisees.

Last year the Sharetea brand was in the spotlight when the Fair Work Ombudsman recovered $89,952 in unpaid wages for 36 workers.

The FWO investigation of 14 outlets of the bubble tea chain also found poor record keeping and payslip breaches,

However the FWO said Sharetea Australia was not involved in any of the franchisee contraventions and had taken steps to both educate and audit its franchisees.