Schutz DSL (Australia) Pty Ltd v VIP Plastic Packaging Pty Ltd (No 12) [2011] FCA 1109

Schutz DSL (Australia) Pty Ltd v VIP Plastic Packaging Pty Ltd (No 12) [2011] FCA 1109

The motion was dismissed because Schutz's primary basis for further Norwich Pharmacal orders, an alleged breach by VIP of its undertaking, had been rejected in Schutz No 10, and the additional relief would only support injunctive or labelling relief rejected in Schutz No 10 and Schutz No 11.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 September 2011
Procedural Posture
Trade Marks Proceeding Involving Norwich Pharmacal Relief / Applicants/cross Respondents' Motion to Extend Norwich Pharmacal Orders Made on 3 June 2011
Outcome
The applicants/cross-respondents' motion to extend the Norwich Pharmacal orders made on 3 June 2011 was dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['norwich Pharmacal Relief' 'breach of Undertaking' 'disclosure of Customer Information' 'reconditioned Cross Bottled Ibcs']
['trade Marks' 'civil Procedure'] ['norwich Pharmacal Relief' 'breach of Undertaking' 'disclosure of Customer Information' 'reconditioned Cross Bottled Ibcs']

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

Trade Marks Proceeding Involving Norwich Pharmacal Relief / Applicants/cross Respondents' Motion to Extend Norwich Pharmacal Orders Made on 3 June 2011

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether an alleged breach of undertaking justified extending the Norwich Pharmacal orders made on 3 June 2011.' 'Whether VIP should be required to disclose customers to whom it sold or supplied reconditioned cross-bottled IBCs bearing UN certification markings and Schutz should have leave to write to those customers.']

Ratio Decidendi

The motion was dismissed because Schutz's primary basis for further Norwich Pharmacal orders, an alleged breach by VIP of its undertaking, had been rejected in Schutz No 10, and the additional relief would only support injunctive or labelling relief rejected in Schutz No 10 and Schutz No 11.

Court Disposition

The applicants/cross-respondents' motion to extend the Norwich Pharmacal orders made on 3 June 2011 was dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ["The applicants/cross-respondents' motion to extend the Norwich Pharmacal orders made on 3 June 2011 be dismissed with costs."]