IPONZ updates “Conflicting Class Table”: Implications for trade mark filing in New Zealand

Following implementation of the 13^th edition of the Nice Classification on 1 January 2026, the Intellectual Property Office of New Zealand (IPONZ) has updated its “Conflicting Goods and Services List” and corresponding “Conflicting Class Table”.

While the table remains guidance only, these revisions indicate a broader approach to assessing similarity between goods and services in New Zealand.

Key trends

The updated table reflects expanded cross-class relationships for several sectors:

• Chemicals, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, agricultural products and consumer goods show a greater interconnection.
• Technology related classes, particularly software, telecommunications, media and digital services, demonstrate stronger interrelations, reflecting increasingly integrated product and service ecosystems.
• Increased links between goods, and the corresponding retail, installation, entertainment and hospitality services, consistent with modern brand models where goods and services are delivered together.

Importantly, the legal test for relative grounds is unchanged.

Under section 25 of the Trade Marks Act 2002, the assessment for similarity involves a three-step inquiry:

(1) Whether the marks are identical or similar

(2) Whether the goods or services are identical or similar

(3) Whether there is risk of confusion or deception.

Similarity of goods and services, and the likelihood of confusion, is assessed by reference to the nature of the goods or services, their purpose, trade channels, end users, and whether they are in competition, substitutable, or complementary. The assessment is undertaken from the perspective of notional use of the marks as filed.

Against that framework, IPONZ continues to assess similarity primarily by reference to specific goods and services at issue, and their classification aided by the Conflicting Class Table. The revised table signals where examiners may be more inclined to identify similarity during examiner and, as a consequence, an increase in the likelihood of confusion.

Notable developments

Personal care, cosmetics and wellness sectors

The updated table reflects an increased recognition of overlap between cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, supplements, medical devices and beauty or wellness services. This in turn reflects the ongoing convergence of cosmetic, therapeutic and wellness offerings.

Class 1 captures chemical substances and preparations used as inputs or functional components, potentially including certain active ingredients used in cosmetic, therapeutic or wellness products. The updated table now reflects an overlap with Classes 3 and 5, recognising that similar active ingredients may be deployed across cosmetic, pharmaceutical and supplement applications.

Technology expansion

Notably, the revised table significantly expands the range of classes treated as potentially conflicting with class 9 goods. Compared with the previous version, it reflects a more integrated understanding of how software, digital technologies and electronic goods are developed, marketed and delivered.

Stronger links are drawn between class 9 and telecommunications, media, education, security services and certain consumer goods sectors.

This shift recognises that software and digital products are rarely marketed in isolation. Technology brands commonly operate across ecosystems combining software, cloud services, telecommunications platforms, digital content, retail services and associated goods. IPONZ now appears to treat these offerings as commercially proximate for examination purposes.

Food and beverage

Stronger links are also drawn between food goods, retail and marketing services, hospitality services and health and nutrition services. This is particularly relevant to functional foods, wellness products and direct to consumer lifestyle brands operating across product and service channels.

Practical implications for filing in New Zealand

Applicants filing in New Zealand should consider the following:

1. Broader clearance searches
   Clearance should extend beyond the identical and traditionally similar classes of goods and services. IPONZ may look more broadly across adjacent sectors, particularly in technology, personal care, food and beverage, consumer lifestyle goods and related services.
   
   
2. Careful specification drafting
   Specifications should be drafted deliberately. Carefully drafted goods and services, including targeted limitations or exclusions where appropriate, can materially reduce objection risk. This is particularly important for software, AI-enabled products, consumer goods with service components and brands operating across retail or digital ecosystems.
   
   
3. Expect a more conservative approach in some sectors
   Foreign applicants, in particular, should anticipate a greater likelihood of cross-sector citations in areas where overlap was historically less recognised. While this does not necessarily indicate substantive conflict, it reinforces the importance of proactive clearance and drafting.
   
   
4. The table remains guidance only
   The conflicting class table does not alter the legal test. Well-reasoned submissions remain effective in overcoming citations where genuine distinctions exist.

The update does not represent a shift in legal principle, but it does signal a more nuanced examination approach adapting to changes in markets and classification. In an environment where goods and services are rarely offered in isolation, careful upfront strategy, particularly in clearance and specification drafting, will be critical to managing risk and avoiding unnecessary objections.

Conflicting Class Table

The below table shows the changes made to the Conflicting Class Table. Additional classes which are now considered to potentially conflict with the class identified (column labelled “Class”) have been identified in bold underline.

If you require advise on how these changes affect your IP position, please reach out to one of our trade mark experts.