6 Aug 2014
NESTLE NEW ZEALAND LTD v MARS NEW ZEALAND LTD [2014] NZHC 1837
- Citation
- [2014] NZHC 1837
- Court
- High Court
Summary judgment was dismissed because factual questions remained as to how a reasonable consumer would perceive the protein claim in light of the adjacent qualifying text and expert evidence on consumer attention, so Mars had an arguable defence; interim injunction was refused because Nestlé delayed in acting, Mars would suffer disproportionate commercial disruption and could meet damages, and there was no evidence of actual consumer harm, so balance of convenience and overall justice did not favour injunctive relief.