An interlocutory injunction is an order made by the Court prior to trial either preventing or requiring some undertaking to be taken by one or more parties. The Courts acknowledge that the imposition of such an interlocutory injunction on a party is not necessarily final and is subject to change. As such, an undertaking as to damages is usually required by the party seeking an interlocutory injunction (Applicant). This article discusses the established principles the Court will use to discern whether an Applicant has an adequate case for granting an interlocutory injunction. [Read more…]
Litigation
Costs in unfair dismissal applications – part 4
28 July 2021 by
Previous articles by Dundas Lawyers have looked at the difficulties confronted in obtaining a costs order against an unsuccessful party in an unfair dismissal application (Application). To recap, section 611(1) of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) (FWA) holds that a party to an Application, be it the complainant employee or the respondent employer, must bear its own costs in relation to a matter before the Fair Work Commission (FWC). However, there are circumstances when the other side’s costs can be imposed on a party to an Application. This article outlines these circumstances. [Read more…]
Calculating account of profits for trade mark infringement
28 July 2021 by
Where a Court has determined that a trade mark has been infringed, the plaintiff (Plaintiff) must elect between receiving an account of profits or damages as a remedy. This article discusses how the Courts have determined the total to be awarded to the Plaintiff where an account of profits is chosen . In short, an account of profits requires the infringer to give up their ill-gotten gains to the party whose rights have been infringed.[1] [Read more…]
Unjustified threats of trademark infringement
16 July 2021 by
Where a party threatens another with legal proceedings for trademark infringement the recipient of the threats may have grounds to commence proceedings for making unjust threats. In other words where the threats are unjustified the recipient may apply to the Court for relief from the unjust threats. [Read more…]
Amended process for applications – QLD Supreme Court
4 June 2021 by
The Supreme Court of Queensland has done away with various procedural practices designed to manage the new requirements, particularly surrounding social distancing, imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic. In short, the Protocol for Applications (Protocol) to the Supreme Court are to be heard in person unless leave has been granted by a Judge to appear by telephone or video-link. [Read more…]
What is a Case Management Hearing?
30 March 2021 by
In the Federal Court of Australia, a case management hearing is a meeting of the parties and the Court to identify issues at the earliest possible stage (Case Management Hearing).[1] They are the essential element of, and main procedure used in achieving, case management.[2] In Queensland Courts, they are referred to as case management conferences.[3] Case Management Hearings may be referred to by different terms in each State. This article discusses Case Management Hearings in the Federal Court. [Read more…]
The tort of injurious falsehood
15 February 2021 by
Injurious falsehood is a tort which arises when a person makes false representations about the goods and services of a person or company. The representations can be either written or spoken, and must encourage others not to deal with the person or business, in turn resulting in damage. Notably, injurious falsehood offers a remedy when a cause of action for defamation is not available under the Defamation Act 2005 (Cth)(Act). [Read more…]
Review of QBCC decisions – part 1
19 January 2021 by
Under the Queensland Building and Construction Commission Act 1991 (Act) the Queensland Building and Construction Commission (QBCC) is empowered to make a variety of decisions including, but not limited to: [Read more…]
Warning – Facebook trolls ordered to pay $150k damages
24 December 2020 by
In the recent unreported case of Moy v Isaac & Smith, featured in an article published by the Courier Mail on 15 November 2020, two online trolls were ordered to pay $150,000 to a wedding planner after creating a number of defamatory Facebook posts about her business. [Read more…]
The tort of passing off
27 November 2020 by
The tort of “passing off” occurs where one trader (Defendant) has wrongly represented that its goods or services are related to those of another (Plaintiff) by imitating the latter’s “get-up”, or look and feel of their product or service.[1] A passing off action is designed to provide a remedy when this situation results in damage to the Plaintiff’s business reputation. It is usually pleaded as an alternative cause of action to misleading and deceptive conduct pursuant to the Australian Consumer Law, contained inside schedule 2 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth). [Read more…]
