Gillette Company v Schiavini [2008] FCA 1053

Gillette Company v Schiavini [2008] FCA 1053

The respondent's commercial importation of goods bearing the applicants' registered trade marks without authorisation constituted infringement under the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth); the applicants were therefore entitled to declarations and injunctive relief as well as a lump sum costs order given the respondent's default.

Parties
First Applicant: The Gillette Company; Second Applicant: Procter and Gamble International Operations Pte Ltd; Respondent: Josefina Schiavini
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 July 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil / Final Judgment After Default (no Appearance by Respondent)
Outcome
Declarations and injunctions granted for trade mark infringement; lump sum costs ordered against respondent; exhibits returned; application otherwise dismissed.
Legal Topics
Trade Mark Infringement, Importation of Infringing Goods, Relief for Breach of Registered Trade Mark
Intellectual Property Trade Mark Infringement Importation of Infringing Goods Relief for Breach of Registered Trade Mark

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Gillette Company

First Applicant

Procter and Gamble International Operations Pte Ltd

Second Applicant

Josefina Schiavini

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Final Judgment After Default (no Appearance by Respondent)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent infringed the applicants' registered trade marks by importation of goods without consent
  2. 2 Whether declarations and injunctions should be granted for trade mark infringement
  3. 3 Whether lump sum costs should be awarded in default absence of the respondent

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent's commercial importation of goods bearing the applicants' registered trade marks without authorisation constituted infringement under the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth); the applicants were therefore entitled to declarations and injunctive relief as well as a lump sum costs order given the respondent's default.

Court Disposition

Declarations and injunctions granted for trade mark infringement; lump sum costs ordered against respondent; exhibits returned; application otherwise dismissed.

Orders

  • Declarations of infringement of Trade Mark Nos 28857, 759667, 863355, and 1031429.
  • Respondent restrained from infringing Trade Mark Nos 28857, 759667, 863355, and 1031429.