Deckers Outdoor Corporation Pty Ltd v Farley (No 6) [2010] FCA 391

Deckers Outdoor Corporation Pty Ltd v Farley (No 6) [2010] FCA 391

Charges of contempt established beyond reasonable doubt where respondents had knowledge of clear court orders, engaged in deliberate and voluntary prohibited conduct, and failed to comply with asset-disclosure orders. Admissions, direct evidence, and inferences supported applicant's case against majority of respondents; court dispensed with strict service requirements where respondents had opportunity to respond and no prejudice was shown.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 April 2010
Procedural Posture
Contempt / Finding on Liability; Directions for Penalty Hearing
Outcome
Contempt charges established; directions for penalty hearing
Legal Topics
['trade Mark Infringement' 'copyright Infringement' 'passing Off' 'breach of Interlocutory and Permanent Injunctions' 'breach of Undertakings' 'duty to Comply With Court Orders' 'proof and Procedure for Contempt' 'service and Notice Requirements']
['intellectual Property' 'trade Practices' 'contempt of Court' 'civil Procedure'] ['trade Mark Infringement' 'copyright Infringement' 'passing Off' 'breach of Interlocutory and Permanent Injunctions' 'breach of Undertakings' 'duty to Comply With Court Orders' 'proof and Procedure for Contempt' 'service and Notice Requirements']

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

Contempt / Finding on Liability; Directions for Penalty Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether respondents committed contempt by breaching interlocutory and permanent injunctions restricting manufacture, distribution, and sale of Ugg-branded footwear' 'Whether respondents failed to comply with Court orders to file affidavits of assets' 'Whether respondents deliberately contravened Court undertakings and orders']

Ratio Decidendi

Charges of contempt established beyond reasonable doubt where respondents had knowledge of clear court orders, engaged in deliberate and voluntary prohibited conduct, and failed to comply with asset-disclosure orders. Admissions, direct evidence, and inferences supported applicant's case against majority of respondents; court dispensed with strict service requirements where respondents had opportunity to respond and no prejudice was shown.

Court Disposition

Contempt charges established; directions for penalty hearing

Orders

  • ['Hearing of penalty adjourned to specified date; Respondents to file affidavits and submissions for penalty; Applicant to respond with evidence and submissions.']