Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Verrocchi v Direct Chemist Outlet Pty Ltd [2016] FCAFC 104 Appeal from: Verrocchi v Direct Chemist Outlet Pty Ltd [2015] FCA 234; (2015) 112 IPR 200
File number: VID 211 of 2015
Judges: NICHOLAS, MURPHY AND BEACH JJ
Date of judgment: 16 August 2016
Catchwords: TRADE PRACTICES – misleading or deceptive conduct – storefront get-up – secondary reputation in colour or colour palette and other trade indicia – common trade indicia – overall impression – consistency and distinctiveness of get-up – intention to mislead or deceive – evidence of copying – sufficiency of differentiation – no error by primary judge – appeal dismissed
Legislation: Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth), Sch 2, ss 18 and 29 Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) ss 52 and 53
Cases cited: Australian Woollen Mills Ltd v FS Walton & Co Ltd (1937) 58 CLR 641 Branir Pty Ltd v Owston Nominees (No 2) Pty Ltd (2001) 117 FCR 424 Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd v Darrell Lea Chocolate Shops Pty Ltd (2007) 159 FCR 397 Dr Martens Australia Pty Ltd v Rivers (Australia) Pty Ltd (1999) 95 FCR 136 Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV v Remington Products Australia Pty Ltd (2000) 100 FCR 90 Peter Bodum A/S v DKSH Australia Pty Ltd (2011) 280 ALR 639; [2011] FCAFC 98 Sydneywide Distributors Pty Ltd v Red Bull Australia Pty Ltd (2002) 234 FCR 549; [2002] FCAFC 157 Warren v Coombes (1979) 142 CLR 531 Windsor Smith Pty Ltd v Dr Martens Australia Pty Ltd (2000) 49 IPR 286; [2000] FCA 756
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate