TORT – trespass – injurious falsehood – applicant seeks permanent injunctive relief to restrain respondent from publishing video images obtained as a result of trespasses – where applicant operates a commercial abattoir – where respondent is an animal rights organisation – where relevant video images portray scenes from within abattoir – where respondent made initial publication of relevant video images – where interim injunction granted to prevent publication – where trespasses are admitted – whether initial publication amounted to injurious falsehood – whether initial publication conveyed false representations as to applicant’s business – whether initial publication actuated by malice – whether applicant suffered special damage by alleged injurious falsehood – whether applicant entitled to permanent injunctive relief – whether damages an adequate remedy – whether applicant entitled to award of general damages – whether applicant entitled to award of exemplary damages – application allowed in part.
CONSUMER LAW – whether initial publication was misleading or deceptive, or likely to mislead or deceive – whether relief under Australian Consumer Law available to applicant – application refused.
EQUITY – whether respondent’s ownership under Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) of copyright in imagery obtained during trespass is held on trust for applicant – whether existence of trust should be recognised – whether assignment of legal interests should be required – application refused.
Related cases about tort law and copyright
-
Dreamstreet Lending Pty Ltd v Weiss (No 2) [2023] FCA 684
CONTRACT – contractual interpretation – breach of contract – services agreement between consultant and mortgage broking business – where applicant claimed consultant breached notice period clause – where applicant claimed consultant breached an exclusive service obligation – where applicant claimed consultant breached confidentiality obligations – where consultant made and retained various downloads of customer-related information…
-
Motorola Solutions, Inc. v Hytera Communications Corporation Ltd (Liability) [2022] FCA 1585
PATENTS – Applicant patentee of three method patents relating to digital mobile radios (‘DMR’) using Time Division Multiple Access (‘TDMA’) to divide frequency channel – disputed constructions – fair basing – inventive step – identification of inventive step in claims – manner of manufacture – stare decisis – whether Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd v…
-
Bing! Software Pty Ltd v Bing Technologies Pty Limited (No 4) [2024] FCA 607
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application to set aside order under r 39.05(f) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 – Where order entered in favour of the applicant – Where the applicant is no longer trading – Where the trademark is no longer registered – Where no benefit derived from the order – Where all parties…
