Insulation industry news from Global Insulation

New Zealand: TechnoNicol’s Techno mineral wool plant in Ryazan has sent a test batch of products to New Zealand. Following feedback the insulation producer plans to arrange a regular export of materials to the region.

New Zealand: Fletcher Materials has said that it has been able to strengthen its insulation business in both New Zealand and Australia due to improvements in service and relative cost position in the six months to 31 December 2016, following site closures at its Fletcher Insulation business. Overall, operating earnings before significant items for its Building Materials lines, including plasterboard and insulation products, rose by 10% year-on-year to US$38m from US$34.4m.

New Zealand: Fletcher Building has reported that its net profit rose by 51% year-on-year to US$114m in the half year that ended on 31 December 2015 from US$75.6m in the same period in 2014. Its sales rose by 2.5% to US$2.94bn from US$2.87bn. It attributed this to growth in its building products and distribution businesses making up for weaker earnings from Formica and New Zealand housing developments.

Fletcher Building reported that gypsum wallboard volumes via its Building Products division rose by 9% in the half year. Volumes of performance board rose by 12%. Sales volumes of insulation rose by 12% in New Zealand and 9% in Australia. It noted that its market share has also improved in both insulation markets due to competitive pricing following the strengthening of the US Dollar.

New Zealand: The Court of Appeal has confirmed that the term 'batts' is not in common usage in New Zealand as part of a fight over whether Pink Batts' trademark of the word should be revoked.

Fletcher Building's unit Tasman Insulation makes Pink Batts and sued rival Knauf Insulation for trademark infringement because it used the words 'batt' and 'batts' on its Earthwool products and also on the earthwool.co.nz website. Tasman has owned the Batts trademark for insulation materials in New Zealand since 1973. The term 'batts' is not covered by trademark protection outside New Zealand and is used in Australia and the USA to describe pre-cut pieces of insulation material.

Knauf started exporting some of its Earthwool products to New Zealand in 2011 with packaging that used the words 'batt' and 'batts' in the installation instructions. In November 2011, Knauf applied to revoke Tasman's 'batts' trademark and in December 2015, Tasman started trademark infringement proceedings. Knauf claimed that Tasman's trademark registration was not valid because the word 'batts' had also become generic in New Zealand. To succeed, Knauf had to prove that 'batts' had become a common name in general use by New Zealanders and that this came about by Tasman's acts or omissions.

In his decision in May 2014, the High Court's Justice Brendan Brown did not believe it had. Even if he was wrong on this point, Justice Brown said, Knauf had fallen 'significantly short' of establishing that it was the acts and inactivity of Tasman that caused the trademark to become a common name in general use. The judge also made ruling claims from both sides that the other had breached the Fair Trading Act.

Parts of the case went to the Court of Appeal, which has now largely upheld Justice Brown's rulings. "Our analysis of the origins of the word 'batts' suggests that, at least in New Zealand, the word was not widely used or understood by the general public as a descriptive term and that it did not become a term in general public use until it began to be promoted by Tasman's predecessor after the trade mark was registered in 1973," said Justices Tony Randerson, Christine French and Mark Cooper. "Thereafter, in consequence of the marketing campaigns undertaken, the word 'batts' became strongly associated in the public mind with Tasman's Pink Batts insulation products. We conclude that the judge was correct to find that the term 'batts' had not become a common name in general public use."

The Court of Appeal confirmed that Knauf's use of the word 'batts' on the earthwool.co.nz website did not infringe Tasman's trademark. However, the three judges also found that Justice Brown was right to decide that the Earthwool brand and online marketing were misleading and deceptive. The trio differed with the High Court on one aspect; on whether Knauf's use of the word 'Batt' in the website's code infringed Tasman's trademark. It is understood this was at issue because the website showed in internet searches for 'batts.' While the High Court believed the use of the code did infringe the trademark, the three appeal judges said that this was wrong.

New Zealand: Germany's Knauf and Fletcher Building, New Zealand's largest building supplies company, have returned to court for a cross appeal, the latest instalment of their long-running dispute over the use of the word 'batts' to describe insulation.

Appearing in the Court of Appeal before Justices Tony Randerson, Christine French and Mark Cooper, the legal counsel for Fletcher's Tasman Insulation subsidiary, Julian Miles QC returned to the argument that Knauf's use of 'batt' or 'batts' on the packaging of insulation infringed the 'Batts' trademark it has held since 1973.

The two building supplies companies are both appealing aspects of Justice Brendan Brown's May 2014 judgment, which refused a request from Knauf to revoke the trademark. In the same judgment, Justice Brown also limited Fletcher's claim of infringement of the trademark to the use of 'batt' in the HTML code on the www.earthwool.co.nz website, which sold Knauf insulation, and said the use of the word in the installation instructions on the packaging didn't infringe trademark.

Dwarfed by more than 10 boxes of files and three large rolls of Knauf insulation, Tasman's Miles said the rival company first started importing its insulation into New Zealand in December 2010, originally in clear packaging labeled 'loft roll.' However, during 2011 Knauf began to bring in 'what we understand was the same product with different packaging,' which included instructions which referred to the product as 'batts.' Miles pointed out the difference using the three insulation rolls in the court room.

Miles argued that Knauf's use of 'batts' on its packaging was a 'deliberate' attempt to use Fletcher's trademarked term. He said the change from the original non-offending packaging to the inclusion of the term came after market research showed the widespread use of the term over the past four decades.

Knauf 'knew (Batts) had a trademark, the only inference that you can draw from that is that they intended to undermine a trademark,' he said, adding that it was' irrelevant' how the term was used in other countries, as this dispute concerned only the New Zealand market.

Knauf, represented by Clive Elliott QC, is appealing Justice Brown's ruling that the 'Batts' trademarked term for insulation is not generic. In its submission Knauf argues Tasman was flawed in asserting 'Batts' was a highly distinctive and iconic trademark, and it has always been a descriptive word to describe portions of insulation. There is no evidence Knauf set out to destroy the distinctiveness of 'Batts' and Tasman's efforts to protect the mark were 'too little, too late.'

"Knauf submits that if traders have chosen not to use 'batts' it is reasonable to infer that this is because of a fear of being sued by Tasman rather than in express of implied acknowledgement of Tasman's proprietary assertions," Knauf said it its submission. The company points to CSR, which had also applied to revoke the trademark use of the term as further proof it is considered a generic term.

The global insulation business said the use of 'batt' and 'batts' on its insulation bales imported into New Zealand was because of the genuine belief the word was descriptive. The original bales had been shipped from Russia and the USA, where the words are considered generic terms and it wasn't economical to manufacture product with New Zealand-specific packaging.

The hearing is set down for three days in the Court of Appeal, and is continuing.

New Zealand: Fletcher Building has forecast an upturn in earnings as it moves to triple the pace of home building in New Zealand and is involved in a pilot social housing project with the government in Christchurch. The company told shareholders at its annual general meeting that full-year operating earnings in the 2015 financial year could rise by as much as 11% to US$650-690m, compared to US$624m in the 2014 financial year.

New Zealand: Fletcher Building will close its Christchurch insulation plant, as it consolidates its Tasman Insulations operations in a ‘highly competitive market.’ The proposal would see 29 Christchurch factory workers lose their jobs manufacturing Pink Batts insulation, while its Auckland factory will become a round-the-clock operation. Current Christchurch-based customer service, sales and warehousing roles will be unaffected, with two new jobs created, while nine further positions at the Auckland plant will be offered.

"Consolidation is in the best interest of our people and our customers," said Tim Richards, chief executive of building products. "We are operating in a highly competitive market, impacted by an increase in volume of imported product and a general reduction in demand for insulation following changes to EECA's home insulation programme in 2013."

New Zealand: Import tariffs on a range of building materials have been suspended in a move that is estimated to reduce the cost of a new home by US$3500. The suspension was announced in the May budget and comes into effect on 1 July 2014.

"The building materials covered by the tariff suspension comprise about 90% of the cost of the material in an average new house," said housing minister Nick Smith. He added that the tariffs would be suspended for five years. "It includes materials such as roofing, cladding, framing, windows, doors, insulation, plumbing and electrical components."

The government has already removed anti-dumping duties for building materials as part of its strategy to bring down the cost of new homes. "There is no single magical solution. It is about making a whole lot of changes that aggregate together to make homes more affordable," said Smith.

New Zealand: German building materials company Knauf has failed to get Fletcher Building's use of the 'Batts' trademark for building insulation thrown out on the grounds that it is a common name in general public use.

Justice Brendan Brown refused a request to revoke the trademark and said that the use of the word in the installation instructions on packaging didn't infringe trademark. "There is clearly a not insignificant degree of use of the words 'batt' and 'batts' to describe insulation in a generic, non-proprietary sense," Justice Brown said. "However, collectively this evidence is not of a quantity or a quality to cause me to be satisfied that the trademark has become a common name in general public use for pieces of fibrous insulation."

Knauf exported some of its Earthwool insulation to New Zealand in 2011, with packaging displaying the words 'batt' and 'batts' in the installation instructions, with sparked the litigation. Fletcher protested the use of its trademark word 'Batts' and Knauf subsequently claimed that the word had become generic to describe insulation.

The High Court case shows intense rivalry between the companies in New Zealand, where an estimated 15Mm² of insulation products are sold every year, most of it made from glass. Fletcher's subsidiary Tasman Insulation makes more than 7Mm² of insulation from recycled glass a year, sold under the Pink Batts brand.

Fletcher is facing increasing competition from Knauf, which has about US$1.9bn in annual insulation sales worldwide compared to Fletcher's US$1.3bn of total building product sales, which also includes plasterboard, aluminium doors and windows and roofing. In February 2014 Fletcher said that the local insulation market remained competitive as price declines offset volume gains.

New Zealand: A fire at an insulation storage building in the Auckland suburb of Onehunga on New Zealand's North Island has been brought under control by fire fighters with a total of 15 fire engines. No one was seriously injured at the facility, operated by Textile Products.

The fire service said that it was called to the incident at about 11:00 on the morning of 16 January 2012. The ambulance service reported that it had treated five people for minor injuries. The cause of the fire is not yet known.

Fire Service incident controller Brian Edwards said there was a possibility the smoke and fumes could be toxic. "We will have to decontaminate some of the firefighters," he said. Edwards also said that there had been fears that the fire may spread to an adjacent chemical waste facility, but this did not happen. One fire engine was kept at the scene overnight.