Safer Storage Systems v Dexion (Australia) [2019] FCA 1784

Safer Storage Systems v Dexion (Australia) [2019] FCA 1784

There is a serious question to be tried as to whether the restrictive covenants are enforceable and whether SSS has contravened them, but the balance of convenience strongly favours refusal of interlocutory injunctive relief due to the disproportionate harm to SSS, its employees, and its business. No prima facie case of trade mark infringement was established on the evidence before the Court.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Interlocutory Injunction / Interlocutory Application Determination
Outcome
Interlocutory application dismissed
Legal Topics
['interlocutory Injunction' 'restraint of Trade' 'supply Agreement' 'trade Mark Infringement' 'australian Consumer Law' 'restrictive Covenants' 'competition and Consumer Act']
['practice and Procedure' 'contract' 'intellectual Property' 'competition Law'] ['interlocutory Injunction' 'restraint of Trade' 'supply Agreement' 'trade Mark Infringement' 'australian Consumer Law' 'restrictive Covenants' 'competition and Consumer Act']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Interlocutory Injunction / Interlocutory Application Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether interlocutory injunction should be granted to restrain alleged contraventions of restrictive covenants in a supply agreement' 'Whether interlocutory injunction should be granted to restrain alleged trade mark infringement' 'Whether restrictive covenants are enforceable or amount to an unreasonable restraint of trade' 'Whether a prima facie case of trade mark infringement is established']

Ratio Decidendi

There is a serious question to be tried as to whether the restrictive covenants are enforceable and whether SSS has contravened them, but the balance of convenience strongly favours refusal of interlocutory injunctive relief due to the disproportionate harm to SSS, its employees, and its business. No prima facie case of trade mark infringement was established on the evidence before the Court.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory application dismissed

Orders

  • ['The interlocutory application filed on 8 August 2019 by the cross-claimant be dismissed.' 'Within 7 days, the parties are to file and serve submissions of no more than 2 pages addressing the costs of the interlocutory application filed on 8 August 2019.']