Category: IP and Trade Practices

Allergan Australia Pty Ltd v Self Care IP Holdings Pty Ltd – Part 2: Allergan’s liability case

Trade marks – infringement claim under s 120 of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) – consumer law – misleading or deceptive conduct – torts – passing off – whether director should be held personally liable – Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 (Cth) – whether respondents infringed applicants’ BOTOX marks by using PROTOX as a trade mark

Allergan Australia Pty Ltd v Self Care IP Holdings Pty Ltd – Part 1: Introduction

Trade marks – infringement claim under s 120 of the Trade Marks Act – consumer law – misleading or deceptive conduct – torts – passing off – whether director should be held personally liable – cross-claim for removal from Register for non-use – opposition – appeal under s 56 of the Trade Marks Act – BOTOX and PROTOX

Fearless in the face of bull: using Australian discovery in US litigation

Copyright – exclusive rights in respect of commissioned artwork in the US – replica artwork sold by the artist for a similar purpose in Australia

Practice and procedure – separate proceedings in the US arising from same events – obligation to use discovered documents only for the proceeding in which they were originally produced (“Harman obligation”) – circumstances warranting release or modification of the Harman obligation

Motor tyre brand overcomes a MONSTER obstacle

Trade marks – opposition – whether applicant “true owner” – marks used by associated company of the applicant – whether marks used under licence – whether likelihood of confusion – reputation in trade marks – relevance of prior use

Evidence – admissibility – admissibility of archived internet documents sourced through the “Wayback Machine” – whether business records

BEGAs can’t be choosers

Trade mark – trade mark licensing agreement – whether trade mark owner’s plans to brand other products with the licensed mark in breach of the agreement – whether trade mark licensee in breach of agreement

Practice and procedure – discovery – confidentiality – circumstances warranting access limitations additional to the Harman obligation – whether parties “trade rivals” – centrality of documents to issues in the proceeding