Richardson & Wrench Ltd v Peet & Co Ltd & Anor [1987] FCA 812

Richardson & Wrench Ltd v Peet & Co Ltd & Anor [1987] FCA 812

Because the alleged offending conduct is longstanding and the final hearing is imminent, interlocutory injunctive relief is not appropriate and the proceedings should be transferred to Perth.

Parties
Applicant: Richardson & Wrench Limited; First Respondent: Peet & Company Limited; Second Respondent: Anthony Wayne Lennon
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 March 1987
Procedural Posture
Application for Interlocutory Injunction / Directions Hearing; Transfer of Proceedings
Outcome
Interlocutory injunction not granted; proceedings transferred
Legal Topics
Trade Marks, Passing Off, Interlocutory Injunctions, Transfer of Proceedings
Intellectual Property Trade Marks Passing Off Interlocutory Injunctions Transfer of Proceedings

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richardson & Wrench Limited

Applicant

Peet & Company Limited

First Respondent

Anthony Wayne Lennon

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Interlocutory Injunction / Directions Hearing; Transfer of Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether interlocutory injunctive relief should be granted to restrain use of a logo alleged to be deceptively similar
  2. 2 Whether proceedings should be transferred to Perth registry

Ratio Decidendi

Because the alleged offending conduct is longstanding and the final hearing is imminent, interlocutory injunctive relief is not appropriate and the proceedings should be transferred to Perth.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory injunction not granted; proceedings transferred

Orders

  • Applicant to file and serve written statement of grounds and affidavits by 27 March
  • Respondents given leave to file and serve cross claims by 27 March