Advanced Hobbies International Pty Ltd v Dawn Developments Pty Ltd [1995] FCA 258

Advanced Hobbies International Pty Ltd v Dawn Developments Pty Ltd [1995] FCA 258

Although there is a serious question to be tried regarding entitlement to injunctive relief, the balance of convenience strongly favours the respondent, and the applicant's undertaking as to damages is of little value. Accordingly, the application for interlocutory relief should be refused upon the respondent's formal undertaking to the Court.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 April 1995
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application for Interlocutory Injunction / Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Application for interlocutory relief dismissed
Legal Topics
['interlocutory Injunction' 'trade Mark Ownership' 'balance of Convenience']
['intellectual Property'] ['interlocutory Injunction' 'trade Mark Ownership' 'balance of Convenience']

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

Urgent Application for Interlocutory Injunction / Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the respondent should be restrained from using the trade mark 'Kyosho'" 'Dispute as to ownership of the trade mark' 'Whether the applicant is entitled to enforce rights as registered proprietor']

Ratio Decidendi

Although there is a serious question to be tried regarding entitlement to injunctive relief, the balance of convenience strongly favours the respondent, and the applicant's undertaking as to damages is of little value. Accordingly, the application for interlocutory relief should be refused upon the respondent's formal undertaking to the Court.

Court Disposition

Application for interlocutory relief dismissed

Orders

  • ['Application for interlocutory relief dismissed' "Court notes the respondent's undertaking as set out in the judgment" "Costs of the application for interlocutory relief to be the respondent's costs of the proceedings"]