Caterpillar Inc & Anor v Sun Forward Pty Ltd [1996] FCA 1187

Caterpillar Inc & Anor v Sun Forward Pty Ltd [1996] FCA 1187

Leave to appeal was granted because the substantive orders challenged were final orders determining substantive rights and granting final injunctive relief, the respondent had not agreed to split liability and quantum and was not responsible for the procedural position, no good reason was shown to defer appeal rights until after determination of damages or an account of profits, and granting leave would not itself stay the proceeding or prejudice its further hearing. Discovery was ordered because the applicants required it to make an informed election between damages and an account of profits, the orders were not shown to be oppressive or excessive, and no contrary authority or good...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 December 1996
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Judgment and Application for Discovery / Reasons for Judgment on the Respondent's Motion for Leave to Appeal and the Applicants' Application for Discovery
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; discovery orders made.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Judgment' 'final Orders Included in Interlocutory Judgment' 'discovery' 'election Between Damages and Account of Profits' 'copyright Infringement' 'passing Off' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct']
['practice and Procedure' 'intellectual Property' 'consumer Law'] ['leave to Appeal' 'interlocutory Judgment' 'final Orders Included in Interlocutory Judgment' 'discovery' 'election Between Damages and Account of Profits' 'copyright Infringement' 'passing Off' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct']

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

Application for Leave to Appeal From Interlocutory Judgment and Application for Discovery / Reasons for Judgment on the Respondent's Motion for Leave to Appeal and the Applicants' Application for Discovery

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave to appeal should be granted from orders and declarations that included final orders on passing off and Trade Practices Act claims and interlocutory judgments for damages or an account of profits.' 'Whether leave to appeal should be determined only by whether the judgment appealed from is attended by sufficient doubt and whether substantial injustice would result if leave were refused.' 'Whether special considerations warranted granting leave to appeal before damages or an account of profits were determined.' 'Whether discovery should be ordered to enable the applicants to make an informed election between damages and an account of profits for copyright infringement.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was granted because the substantive orders challenged were final orders determining substantive rights and granting final injunctive relief, the respondent had not agreed to split liability and quantum and was not responsible for the procedural position, no good reason was shown to defer appeal rights until after determination of damages or an account of profits, and granting leave would not itself stay the proceeding or prejudice its further hearing. Discovery was ordered because the applicants required it to make an informed election between damages and an account of profits, the orders were not shown to be oppressive or excessive, and no contrary authority or good...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; discovery orders made.

Orders

  • ['I grant the respondent leave to appeal against the orders in paragraphs 2, 3, 4, 6(b), (c) and (d), 7, 10, 12 and 15 of the orders of Drummond J made on 20 November 1996;' 'I make orders for discovery as set out in the proposed form of order which has been handed to me by counsel, as initialled and altered by me.']