THE WALT DISNEY CO AND OTHERS v. D LAND TRAVEL LTD AND ANOTHER

THE WALT DISNEY CO AND OTHERS v. D LAND TRAVEL LTD AND ANOTHER

The 2nd defendant's offers and payment into court were insufficient and unreasonable for the plaintiffs to accept because they failed to include clear undertakings and mandatory injunctions necessary in a passing off case and payment into court does not address injunctive relief; therefore the 2nd defendant's application was dismissed and the costs order nisi made absolute.

Citation
THE WALT DISNEY CO AND OTHERS v. D LAND TRAVEL LTD AND ANOTHER
Parties
1st Plaintiff: The Walt Disney Company; 2nd Plaintiff: Disney Enterprises, Inc.; 3rd Plaintiff: The Walt Disney Company Asia Pacific Limited; 1st Defendant: D Land Travel Limited; 2nd Defendant: Mak Wai Yin
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
20 June 2008
Case Number
HCA3864/2001
Procedural Posture
Passing Off (intellectual Property) / Costs Application (post Judgment)
Outcome
Application dismissed; costs order nisi made absolute against the 2nd defendant; 2nd defendant to pay plaintiffs' costs of the action including reserved costs, to be taxed if not agreed.
Legal Topics
Passing Off, Calderbank Offer, Payment Into Court, Injunctions, Costs Order
Source Language
EN
Intellectual Property Civil Procedure Injunctions Costs Passing Off Calderbank Offer Payment Into Court Costs Order

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

Parties

The Walt Disney Company

1st Plaintiff

Disney Enterprises, Inc.

2nd Plaintiff

The Walt Disney Company Asia Pacific Limited

3rd Plaintiff

D Land Travel Limited

1st Defendant

Mak Wai Yin

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Passing Off (intellectual Property) / Costs Application (post Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant's Calderbank offer obliged the plaintiffs to accept and avoid trial
  2. 2 Whether payment into court is applicable to claims for injunctive relief
  3. 3 Whether the costs order nisi should be made absolute against the 2nd defendant

Ratio Decidendi

The 2nd defendant's offers and payment into court were insufficient and unreasonable for the plaintiffs to accept because they failed to include clear undertakings and mandatory injunctions necessary in a passing off case and payment into court does not address injunctive relief; therefore the 2nd defendant's application was dismissed and the costs order nisi made absolute.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; costs order nisi made absolute against the 2nd defendant; 2nd defendant to pay plaintiffs' costs of the action including reserved costs, to be taxed if not agreed.

Orders

  • Dismissal of the 2nd defendant's application with costs.
  • Costs order nisi made absolute: the defendants to pay the plaintiffs' costs of the action including all costs reserved, to be taxed if not agreed.