The Pokemon Company International, Inc v Pokemon Pty Ltd (No 2) [2023] FCA 1507

The Pokemon Company International, Inc v Pokemon Pty Ltd (No 2) [2023] FCA 1507

The third respondent is in default and, the facts in the statement of claim taken as admitted, has contravened ss 18, 29(1)(g) and 29(1)(h) of the Australian Consumer Law by making false, misleading, or deceptive representations. Injunctive and declaratory relief and costs are appropriate, but not damages since they...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Applicant: The Pokémon Company International, Inc.; First Respondent: Pokemon Pty Ltd; Second Respondent: Xiaoyan Liu; Third Respondent: Kotiota Studio
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 December 2023
Procedural Posture
Application for Default Judgment / Hearing and Orders on Application for Default Judgment
Outcome
Default judgment granted against the third respondent with injunctive and declaratory relief and costs ordered. Claim for damages not pursued.
Legal Topics
Default Judgment, Misrepresentation, Injunctive Relief, Australian Consumer Law, False Representations
Intellectual Property Practice and Procedure Default Judgment Misrepresentation Injunctive Relief Australian Consumer Law False Representations

Source-derived case record

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Pokémon Company International, Inc.

Applicant

Pokemon Pty Ltd

First Respondent

Xiaoyan Liu

Second Respondent

Kotiota Studio

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Default Judgment / Hearing and Orders on Application for Default Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether default judgment should be entered against the third respondent under r 5.23(2)(e) of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether the third respondent engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct and false representations in contravention of the Australian Consumer Law

Ratio Decidendi

The third respondent is in default and, the facts in the statement of claim taken as admitted, has contravened ss 18, 29(1)(g) and 29(1)(h) of the Australian Consumer Law by making false, misleading, or deceptive representations. Injunctive and declaratory relief and costs are appropriate, but not damages since they were not pursued.

Court Disposition

Default judgment granted against the third respondent with injunctive and declaratory relief and costs ordered. Claim for damages not pursued.

Orders

  • The applicant's application for default judgment and supporting materials deemed served on the third respondent upon service by email to specified addresses.
  • Applicant to serve the relevant materials and orders on the third respondent as specified.