The High Court of Australia today delivered Commissioner of Taxation v MBI Properties Pty Ltd [2014] HCA 49 (3 December 2014). http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/49.html
Sydney, Australia
1300 00 2088
Tag Archives: Mosman Lawyers
Mosman Lawyers
Cantarella Bros Pty Limited v Modena Trading Pty Limited [2014] HCA 48
The High Court of Australia today delivered Cantarella Bros Pty Limited v Modena Trading Pty Limited [2014] HCA 48 (3 December 2014). http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/2014/48.html
Cantarella Bros Pty Limited and Modena Trading Pty Limited both advertise, offer for sale and sell coffee products in Australia. Since 1958, Cantarella has imported, processed and packaged coffee beans for sale under the trade marks VITTORIA, AURORA, DELTA and CHICCO D’ORO. It is also the registered proprietor of trade marks including MEDAGLIA D’ORO, ORO (ie “Gold”) and CINQUE STELLE (ie “Five Stars”). These trade marks are used in Australia and other countries.
Modena imports coffee from Molinari, an Italian company. Molinari has used various trademarks in Australia including ORO, QUALITY ORO and CINQUE STELLE.
Canteralla brought proceedings in the Federal Court against Modena for trade mark infringement. Modena cross claimed that Canteralla’s trade marks should be cancelled on the grounds that they were not inherently adapted to distinguish the goods for which they were registered under s41 of the Trade Marks Act (1995) (Cth). Canteralla succeeded in the Federal Court.
The Full Court of the Federal Court allowed an appeal by Modena, holding that Cantellara’s trade marks should be cancelled.
The High Court of Australia allowed an appeal brought by Canteralla, holding that their trade marks had been inherently adapted to distinguish the goods for which they were registered from the goods of other persons. The High Court ordered that the Full Court’s orders be set aside.
Sydney, Australia
1300 00 2088
ACCC launches petrol price savings website
The ACCC today launched a website which provides information that will allow motorists to pick the best time in a price cycle to refuel, promising savings of up to 20 cents per litre.
For more information visit https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/petrol-diesel-and-lpg/petrol-price-cycles
Sydney, Australia
1300 00 2088
International Day of Persons with a Disability
DECEMBER 3 is the United Nations International Day of Persons with a Disability.
For more information visit http://www.idpwd.com.au/3-december/ and https://www.humanrights.gov.au/news/events/international-day-persons-disability
Sydney, Australia
1300 00 2088
Thomas Bonham v College of Physicians (“Dr Bonham’s case”) 8 Co Rep 107a; 77 Eng Rep 638 | 1 December 1610
ON 1 DECEMBER 1610, the Chief Justice of the English Court of Common Pleas, Sir Edward Coke, delivered Thomas Bonham v College of Physicians 8 Co Rep 107a; 77 Eng Rep 638.
Dr Bonham had been fined and imprisoned by the Royal College of Physicians for continuing to practise as a Physician in London. He brought a case for false imprisonment.
Coke CJ held that Charter granted by the Parliament to the College of Surgeons was invalid due to bias.
Coke CJ at 118a ruled:
“The censors cannot be judges, ministers, and parties; judges to give
sentence or judgment; ministers to make summons; and parties to have the
moiety of the forfeiture…”
Coke CJ at 118a said:
“It appears in our books that in many cases the common law will control acts of Parliament and sometimes adjudge them to be utterly void; for when an Act of Parliament is against common right and reason, or repugnant, or impossible to be performed, the common law will control it and adjudge such an act to be void.”
The case establishes the rule against bias as a constitutional limit on the exercise of parliament’s legislative powers. In short, (1) a person may not be a judge in their own case and (2) an Act of Parliament is invalid if it conflicts with a basic principle of the common law (such as that a person may not be a judge in their own case).
Sydney, Australia
1300 00 2088
Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R 67 (HL) | 28 November 1893
ON 28 NOVEMBER 1893, the House of Lords delivered Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R 67 (HL).
A party who cross-examines a witness must, out of fairness, “put it” to the witness any contradiction they suggest arises from their evidence in order to give them an opportunity to explain the contradiction.
Per Lord Herschell at 70-71:
“…it seems to me to be absolutely essential to the proper conduct of a cause, where it is intended to suggest that a witness is not speaking the truth on a particular point, to direct his attention to the fact by some questions put in cross-examination showing that imputation is intended to be made, and not to take his evidence and pass it by as a matter altogether unchallenged and, then, when it is impossible for him to explain…to argue that he is a witness unworthy of credit.”
Sydney, Australia
1300 00 2088
Environmental Offences and Penalties Act 1989 (NSW) | 27 November 2009
Twenty Five years ago today, the NSW Parliament enacted the Environmental Offences and Penalties Act 1989.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/num_act/eoapa1989n150370
The Act has since been repealed and incorporated in the NSW Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1987.
Sydney, Australia
1300 00 2088
Penfolds Wines Pty Ltd v Elliott [1946] HCA 46 | 25 November 1946
ON 25 NOVEMBER 1946, the High Court of Australia delivered Penfolds Wines Pty Ltd v Elliott [1946] HCA 46; (1946) 74 CLR 204 (25 November 1946)
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/HCA/1946/46.html
Mr Elliott used of Penfolds’ empty wine bottles to carry other wine.
Dixon J (at 229) said:
“But nothing in the course pursued by the respondent in receiving and filling bottles and returning them could possibly amount to the tort of conversion. The essence of conversion is a dealing with a chattel in a manner repugnant to the immediate right of possession of the person who has the property or special property in the chattel. It may take the form of a disposal of the goods by way of sale, or pledge or other intended transfer of an interest followed by delivery, of the destruction or change of the nature or character of the thing, as for example, pouring water into wine or cutting the seals from a deed, or of an appropriation evidenced by refusal to deliver or other denial of title. But damage to the chattel is not conversion, nor is use, nor is a transfer of possession otherwise than for the purpose of affecting the immediate right to possession, nor is it always conversion to lose the goods beyond hope of recovery. An intent to do that which would deprive “the true owner” of his immediate right to possession or impair it may be said to form the essential ground of the tort.”
The tort of conversion generally concerns a defendant’s intentional dealing with goods in a manner inconsistent with or repugnant to the plaintiff’s ownership of the goods: per Latham CJ at 217 – 221, Dixon J (Starke J agreeing) at 228 – 230, McTiernan J at 234 – 235 and Williams J at 239 – 244.
An act repugnant or inconsistent to the terms of the bailment, or consistent only to treat the goods as his or her own, terminates the bailment resulting in possession revesting to the owner who can sue the bailee in trover: per Latham CJ at pp 214 and 217-8, Dixon J at p 227, McTiernan J at p 233 and Williams J at pp 241-2.
Sydney, Australia
1300 00 2088
Registered Clubs Association of NSW v Australian Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers’ Union, NSW Branch [2000] NSWIRComm 262
ON 14 DECEMBER 2000, the NSW Industrial Relations Commission delivered Registered Clubs Association of NSW v Australian Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers’ Union, NSW Branch [2000] NSWIRComm 262.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWIRComm/2000/262.html
Sydney, Australia
1300 00 2088
Legal help iPhone app
Legal Aid NSW had developed a new iPhone app.
Legal Aid says that the app will allow its users to access a range of useful information including:
The nearest Legal Aid service.
Videos about the law.
Workshops bookings.
Factsheets and other resources.
Legal aid grants.
For more information, visit www.legalaid.nsw.gov.au.
Sydney, Australia
1300 00 2088
Legal Helpdesk Lawyers 