Unilever v Aust Ltd v RFC Nominees Pty Ltd [2000] FCA 1660

The applicant is ordered to discover, to the extent not already discovered, documents relating to the decision to use or actual use of the word 'real', but is not required to discover documents concerning matters not relevant to the issues as framed in the pleadings. General discovery is not granted at this stage.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 13 November 2000
Procedural Posture: Motion for Discovery / Interlocutory
Outcome: Partial grant of discovery; general discovery refused; costs reserved
Legal Topics: ['discovery' 'trademarks']

['intellectual Property'] ['discovery' 'trademarks']

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

Procedural Posture

Motion for Discovery / Interlocutory

Legal Issues

1 ["Whether further discovery should be ordered, specifically regarding Unilever's use of the word 'real' in advertising and marketing" 'Whether certain documents and information relating to particular individuals and companies are discoverable']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Partial grant of discovery; general discovery refused; costs reserved

Orders

["Applicant to file and serve within 7 days an affidavit discovering any document relating to decision or use of the word 'real' as specified, not already discovered." 'Discovered documents to be produced to Mr Karounos by express delivery as previously arranged.' 'General discovery refused at this stage.' 'Costs of...