Biologi’s Bf & Bk serums contain no Vitamin C – Court Orders prove it!

  • Biologi’s Bf & Bk serums contain no Vitamin C – Court Orders prove it!

    Biologi’s Bf & Bk serums contain no Vitamin C – Court Orders prove it!

    The recent decision of the Federal Court of Australia Native Extracts Pty Ltd v Plant Extracts Pty Ltd [2023] FCA 1265 where final declarations and orders were made against Mr Ross Macdougald (Macdougald), Plant Extracts Pty Ltd ACN 613 551 349 (Plant Extracts) and skincare brand Biologi Pty Ltd ACN 618 697 297 (Biologi) sheds…

  • Unfair contract terms – automatic renewal clauses explained

    Unfair contract terms – automatic renewal clauses explained

    9 November 2023 was a crucial date for Australian businesses because from that date significant penalties can now be imposed on businesses found to have unfair contract terms (UCT) in their contracts.  The Federal Government had introduced significant changes to laws relating to UCT on 10 November 2022.

  • Changes to unfair contract terms

    Changes to unfair contract terms

    The Treasury Laws Amendment (More Competition, Better Prices) Act 2022 (Cth) (Amending Act) received royal assent on 9 November 2022, introducing significant amendments to the Australian Consumer Law (ACL).  These amendments target the Unfair Contract Terms (UCT) provisions of the ACL, strengthening the rights of consumers while imposing stricter requirements on businesses using Standard Form…

  • What exactly are retained earnings?

    What exactly are retained earnings?

    Retained Earnings are a financial metric that offers a valuable insight into a company’s financial health, extended stability and potential for future growth.  They represent the profit a company has retained overtime after accounting for all liabilities including the payment (if any) of dividends.

  • Plant Extracts Pty Ltd & Ross Macdougald admit misleading conduct – ordered to publish corrective notices

    Plant Extracts Pty Ltd & Ross Macdougald admit misleading conduct – ordered to publish corrective notices

    On 23 October 2023, in the matter of Native Extracts Pty Ltd v Plant Extracts Pty Ltd [2023] FCA 1265 Justice Downes issued an initial judgement and made orders for declaratory relief and the publication of eight (8) corrective notices by Plant Extracts Pty Ltd ACN 613 551 349 (Plant Extracts) and skincare brand Biologi…

  • Skincare brand Biologi breached the ACL – ordered to publish 5 corrective notices

    Skincare brand Biologi breached the ACL – ordered to publish 5 corrective notices

    In a recent decision of the Federal Court in Native Extracts Pty Ltd v Plant Extracts Pty Ltd [2023] FCA 1265 Downes J issued an initial judgement and made orders for declaratory relief and the publication of eight (8) corrective notices by Plant Extracts Pty Ltd ACN 613 551 349 (Plant Extracts) and skincare brand…

  • Trade mark classification guidance from IP Australia

    Trade mark classification guidance from IP Australia

    There has been a surge in trade mark applications in the digital space, notably concerning virtual goods, virtual environments such as the metaverse, NFTs, and the blockchain according to observations made by IP Australia.  This article discusses the things to consider when selecting the classification(s) for virtual goods and services when filing an application for…

  • Misinformation and Disinformation Bill 2023 – draft insights

    Misinformation and Disinformation Bill 2023 – draft insights

    The Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2023 (Cth) (Misinformation Bill) was announced by the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communication and the Arts (DITRDCA) in January 2023.  The Misinformation Bill is aimed at restricting the flow of misinformation and disinformation by providing the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) with increased…

  • “User principle” damages in copyright breach cases

    “User principle” damages in copyright breach cases

    The usual position in intellectual property infringement matters is that the successful applicant can elect between an account of profits or damages.  However, what if the applicant has not suffered any direct loss as a result of the actions of the respondent that is held to have infringed its copyright?

Send this to a friend