Trade mark infringer’s claims to have not profited from wrongdoing rejected
Peter Heerey AM, QC, Tom Cordiner & Alan Nash
Correspondents for South Australia, Victoria and Western Australia
Note: Where any of the barristers were involved in a case reported below and the matter is still running, or potentially so, the other correspondents have taken the role of reporting that case.
Bugatti successfully established that the respondent, in marketing clothing and accessories under the marks BUGATCHI or BUGATCHI UOMO, had infringed Bugatti’s BUGATTI mark, and elected for an account of profits. After being ordered to file relevant financial information, the respondent filed largely deficient affidavit evidence in support of the proposition that it had made no profit during the relevant two year period and then failed to appear at the hearing. Even working with the respondent’s objectionable and inadequate affidavit material, Bugatti was able to satisfy the Court that the respondent plausibly had made at least $550,000 in profit, and obtained an order in its favour accordingly.