Parfums Christian Dior (Australia) Pty Ltd & Anor v Dimmeys Stores Pty Ltd [1997] FCA 1232

Parfums Christian Dior (Australia) Pty Ltd & Anor v Dimmeys Stores Pty Ltd [1997] FCA 1232

There was a serious question to be tried as to misleading or deceptive conduct under s 52 and representations under s 53 of the Trade Practices Act arising from the respondent's advertising and sale of tester products labelled 'Not for Sale,' as well as a serious question as to trade mark infringement where goods were not issued as vendible goods by the registered proprietor and sale occurred without consent. Damages would not be an adequate remedy owing to reputational harm, and the balance of convenience favoured the grant of interlocutory injunctive relief.

Parties
First Applicant: Parfums Christian Dior (Australia) Pty Limited; Second Applicant: Parfums Christian Dior S.A.; Respondent: Dimmeys Stores Pty Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 October 1997
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application for Injunction / Decision on Grant of Interlocutory Relief
Outcome
Interlocutory injunction granted
Legal Topics
Trade Mark Infringement, Misleading or Deceptive Conduct, Interlocutory Injunction, Passing Off
Intellectual Property Competition and Consumer Law Trade Mark Infringement Misleading or Deceptive Conduct Interlocutory Injunction Passing Off

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Parfums Christian Dior (Australia) Pty Limited

First Applicant

Parfums Christian Dior S.A.

Second Applicant

Dimmeys Stores Pty Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application for Injunction / Decision on Grant of Interlocutory Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is a serious question to be tried regarding misleading or deceptive conduct by the respondent under s 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether there is a serious question to be tried as to whether the respondent has represented (contrary to s 53(a), (c), (d) of the Trade Practices Act) that the products have sponsorship, approval, standard, quality, or value they do not have
  3. 3 Whether there is a serious question to be tried as to whether the respondent has infringed the applicants' registered trade marks under the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth)

Ratio Decidendi

There was a serious question to be tried as to misleading or deceptive conduct under s 52 and representations under s 53 of the Trade Practices Act arising from the respondent's advertising and sale of tester products labelled 'Not for Sale,' as well as a serious question as to trade mark infringement where goods were not issued as vendible goods by the registered proprietor and sale occurred without consent. Damages would not be an adequate remedy owing to reputational harm, and the balance of convenience favoured the grant of interlocutory injunctive relief.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory injunction granted

Orders

  • Applicants to bring into Court short minutes of order for interlocutory relief in accordance with the reasons for judgment.
  • Costs of the interlocutory application reserved to the trial judge.