Derrimut Health & Fitness Pty Ltd v Revival 24:7 Gym Pty Ltd [2019] FCA 1988

Derrimut Health & Fitness Pty Ltd v Revival 24:7 Gym Pty Ltd [2019] FCA 1988

Applicants established prima facie cases that respondent infringed copyright, trade mark rights, engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct, and passing off, and that the balance of convenience favoured grant of mandatory and prohibitory interlocutory injunctions; accordingly, relief was granted.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Application for Interlocutory Injunction
Outcome
Mandatory and prohibitory interlocutory injunctions granted; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['interlocutory Injunctions' 'mandatory Injunction' 'prohibitory Injunction' 'copyright Infringement' 'trade Mark Infringement' 'misleading and Deceptive Conduct' 'passing Off']
['practice and Procedure' 'copyright' 'trade Marks' 'consumer Law' 'torts'] ['interlocutory Injunctions' 'mandatory Injunction' 'prohibitory Injunction' 'copyright Infringement' 'trade Mark Infringement' 'misleading and Deceptive Conduct' '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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Application for Interlocutory Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether applicants established a prima facie case for copyright infringement by respondent's publication of photographs" "Whether applicants established a prima facie case for trade mark infringement by respondent's publication of photographs depicting trade mark" 'Whether applicants established a prima facie case for misleading and deceptive conduct under Australian Consumer Law' 'Whether applicants established a prima facie case of passing off' 'Whether the balance of convenience favours granting mandatory and prohibitory interlocutory injunctions']

Ratio Decidendi

Applicants established prima facie cases that respondent infringed copyright, trade mark rights, engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct, and passing off, and that the balance of convenience favoured grant of mandatory and prohibitory interlocutory injunctions; accordingly, relief was granted.

Court Disposition

Mandatory and prohibitory interlocutory injunctions granted; costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['An injunction is granted compelling the Respondent to remove from its website (https://www.revival247.com.au/), by 4.00 pm on 25 November 2019, the photographs copies of which are annexed to this order.' 'An injunction is granted prohibiting the Respondent from displaying, reproducing, publishing or otherwise...