The New South Wales Supreme Court has provided welcome guidance on the relevance of future events to the question of solvency. Specifically, the Court has provided a roadmap on the relevance of (i) future debts which the company may not be able to repay; and (ii) the ability of the company to compromise those debts.
Trade Marks and Australian Consumer Law – termination and breach of Trade Mark Licence Agreement (“TMLA”) – trade mark infringement – misleading or deceptive conduct – false representations – use of CALTEX and STARCARD
Trade Marks – Corner – condition or limitation imposed on registration
Patents – extension of term – which ARTG registration may be relied on
Patents – method of diagnosis – manner of manufacture – sufficiency – fair basis – infringement
Use of the phrases “Love where you live?” and “You love where you live” held not to constitute use of those phrases as a trade mark for the purposes of s 120.
Copyright in plan of subdivision – interlocutory injunction application – balance of convenience weighted against grant of injunction
Patents – transfer of proceedings to Federal Court – overlap in subject matter – risk of inconsistent findings
Patents – amendment to overcome manner of manufacture objection – whether possible to overcome s 102 – whether the principle of finality should prevent iterative amendment applications
Trade marks – validity (s.41) – infringement – defences – s 122(1)(b)(i); s 122(1)(e); s 122(1)(fa)
Consumer Law – replica of “Fearless Girl” statute – discussion of “not insignificant number” criterion – copyright – whether copyright licence granted – inducing breach of contract by artist – limitations on artist’s rights – tort of passing off – trade mark infringement – whether ‘FEARLESS GIRL’ used as a mark.
Trade Marks – Infringement – Interlocutory Injunction – Serious issue to be tried – balance of convenience – application granted.
Three world-class swimmers and the International Swimming League have commenced proceedings in California against FINA to prevent it from banning swimmers, who compete in “non-authorised” swimming events, from competing at the Olympics.
The Court of Appeal, by majority, has held that judgment cannot be entered pursuant to s 16 of the Security of Payments legislation where the payment claim includes “excluded amounts”.