Unilever Aust Ltd v George Karounos & Anor [2001] FCA 238

Unilever Aust Ltd v George Karounos & Anor [2001] FCA 238

No adjournment was merited as the case had been subject to multiple prior adjournments, and Mr Karounos had been put on notice; no error of principle was shown regarding requiring security for costs or the ruling that Mr Karounos had a case to answer; consequently, leave to appeal was refused on both points.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 March 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory; Application for Adjournment and Leave to Appeal Against Interlocutory Orders
Outcome
Applications for adjournment and for leave to appeal refused; costs ordered against Mr Karounos.
Legal Topics
['adjournment' 'security for Costs' 'leave to Appeal' 'burden of Proof' 'trade Marks']
['civil Procedure' 'intellectual Property'] ['adjournment' 'security for Costs' 'leave to Appeal' 'burden of Proof' 'trade Marks']

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

Civil / Interlocutory; Application for Adjournment and Leave to Appeal Against Interlocutory Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether an adjournment should be granted to Mr Karounos' 'Whether leave to appeal should be granted against the order requiring Mr Karounos to pay $8,000 as security for costs' 'Whether leave to appeal should be granted against the decision that there was a case to answer']

Ratio Decidendi

No adjournment was merited as the case had been subject to multiple prior adjournments, and Mr Karounos had been put on notice; no error of principle was shown regarding requiring security for costs or the ruling that Mr Karounos had a case to answer; consequently, leave to appeal was refused on both points.

Court Disposition

Applications for adjournment and for leave to appeal refused; costs ordered against Mr Karounos.

Orders

  • ['The application for an adjournment be refused.' 'The application for leave to appeal against the order that Mr Karounos pay into court within 8 days the sum of $8,000 as security for the costs thrown away by the adjournment on 21 February 2001 be refused.' 'The application for leave to appeal against the decision...