Hoover Co (Australia) Pty Ltd v Spackman [1998] FCA 272

Hoover Co (Australia) Pty Ltd v Spackman [1998] FCA 272

The proposed White Pages entry was an advertisement because it notified readers of the business name, address, contact number and the services supplied, and conveyed that the business provided spare parts and had a factory. Even if paragraph 4 were read with paragraphs 1 and 3 as referring to material promoting the sale or supply of services, the entry promoted the supply of the respondents' services by bringing their availability to readers' attention. The separate question was therefore answered yes.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 March 1998
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion Concerning Whether a Proposed White Pages Telephone Listing Was an Advertisement for the Purposes of an Earlier Federal Court Order / Separate Question Determined on the Hearing of the Motion
Outcome
The separate question was answered yes; the proposed telephone listing was an advertisement for the purposes of Order 4 of Burchett J's order.
Legal Topics
['meaning of Advertisement' 'white Pages Telephone Directory Listing' 'construction of Consent Order' 'alleged Contravention of Earlier Court Order']
['trade Practices' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'injunctions and Court Orders' 'trade Marks'] ['meaning of Advertisement' 'white Pages Telephone Directory Listing' 'construction of Consent Order' 'alleged Contravention of Earlier Court Order']

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

Notice of Motion Concerning Whether a Proposed White Pages Telephone Listing Was an Advertisement for the Purposes of an Earlier Federal Court Order / Separate Question Determined on the Hearing of the Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the proposed telephone listing for the business Hoovex Washing Machine Repair Service was an advertisement for the purposes of Order 4 of the order made by Burchett J on 17 February 1994.' "Whether the proposed 1998 White Pages entry would contravene paragraph 4 of Burchett J's order if it did not include the required statement."]

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed White Pages entry was an advertisement because it notified readers of the business name, address, contact number and the services supplied, and conveyed that the business provided spare parts and had a factory. Even if paragraph 4 were read with paragraphs 1 and 3 as referring to material promoting the sale or supply of services, the entry promoted the supply of the respondents' services by bringing their availability to readers' attention. The separate question was therefore answered yes.

Court Disposition

The separate question was answered yes; the proposed telephone listing was an advertisement for the purposes of Order 4 of Burchett J's order.

Orders

  • ['The proposed telephone listing for the business "Hoover Washing Machine Repair Service" in the form attached to the letter of 23 February 1998 from Hicks & Oakley to Norton Smith & Co is an advertisement for the purposes of Order 4 of the Order of Burchett J made on 17 February 1994 in proceeding No. G274 of...