Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
PDP Capital Pty Ltd v Grasshopper Ventures Pty Ltd (No 2) [2021] FCAFC 147 File number: NSD 1014 of 2020
Judgment of: JAGOT, NICHOLAS AND BURLEY JJ
Date of judgment: 19 August 2021
Catchwords: COSTS – appropriate order as to costs – where appellants substantially failed on appeal – where respondent raised a number of contingent defences – appellants to pay 90% of respondent's costs to be assessed on a lump sum basis
Legislation: Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 1.37
Cases cited: Idenix Pharmaceuticals LLC v Gilead Sciences Pty Ltd (No 2) [2018] FCAFC 7 PDP Capital Pty Ltd v Grasshopper Ventures Pty Ltd [2020] FCA 1078 PDP Capital Pty Ltd v Grasshopper Ventures Pty Ltd [2021] FCAFC 128
Division: General Division
Registry: New South Wales
National Practice Area: Intellectual Property
Sub-area: Trade Marks
Number of paragraphs: 11
Date of last submission/s: 11 August 2021
Date of hearing: Determined on the papers
Counsel for the Appellants/Cross-Respondents: Mr C Dimitriadis SC with Ms S Stewart
Solicitor for the Appellants/Cross-Respondents: Clayton Utz
Counsel for the Respondent/Cross-Appellant: Mr J S Cooke with Mr D B Larish
Solicitor for the Respondent/Cross-Appellant: Bennett & Philp Solicitors
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