Bob Jane Corporation Pty Ltd v ACN 149 801 141 Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 1129

Bob Jane Corporation Pty Ltd v ACN 149 801 141 Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 1129

Mr Jane was not 'trading as a business' as understood in the context of the Court's orders; promotional and preparatory activities, without transactional activity or offering goods or services as a going concern, do not amount to trading as a business. No evidence established beyond reasonable doubt that Mr Jane breached order 3 by trading as a business under a prohibited name or mark.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 September 2016
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application for Contempt of Court / Post Judgment, Determination of Contempt Application
Outcome
Contempt application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['contempt of Court' 'trade Mark Infringement' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'injunctions' 'interpretation of Court Orders']
['intellectual Property' 'trade Marks'] ['contempt of Court' 'trade Mark Infringement' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'injunctions' 'interpretation of Court Orders']

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

Interlocutory Application for Contempt of Court / Post Judgment, Determination of Contempt Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Mr Jane committed contempt of court by breaching order 3 of the November 2013 Orders restraining him from trading as a business under certain names and trade marks' "Construction of the expression 'trading as a business' in the context of the court orders"]

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Jane was not 'trading as a business' as understood in the context of the Court's orders; promotional and preparatory activities, without transactional activity or offering goods or services as a going concern, do not amount to trading as a business. No evidence established beyond reasonable doubt that Mr Jane breached order 3 by trading as a business under a prohibited name or mark.

Court Disposition

Contempt application dismissed.

Orders

  • ["The applicant's interlocutory application dated 23 October 2015 be dismissed." "The applicant pay the fourth respondent's costs of and incidental to the interlocutory application, including any reserved costs, to be taxed if not agreed." 'If either party wishes to seek a variation of the costs order, the party may...