Federal Court of Australia
; CATCHWORDSCONTEMPT OF COURT - Proceedings for infringement of copyright and
breach of secns. 52 and 53 of Trade Practices Act 1974 -
Interlocutory injunction - Whether non-compliance - Construction of injunction - Construction of statement of charge - Whether copyright an element of charge requiring proof - Whether finding of contempt vitiated by failure to prove copyright - Effect of course of proceedings hefore trial judge - Power to dispense with personal service under Order 1, rule 8 - Consideration of
provision for an application to Court to reconsider committal on
payment into Court of sum of money.
Trade Practices Act 1974
JOSEPH LAZAR v. TAITO (AUSTRALIA) PTY LIMITED and TAITO CORPORATION
No. VG 272 of 1984
Fox, McGregor and Neaves Jd.
19 February 1985
Sydney.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY No. VG 272 of 1984
~eweywew
GENERAL DIVISTON
BETWEEN : JOSEPH LAZAR
Appellant AND:
TAITO (AUSTRALIA) PTY LIMITED and TAITO
CORPORATION Respondents ORDER JUDGE: Fox, McGregor and Neaves Jv. DATE OF ORDER: 19 February 1985 WHERE MADE: Sydney.
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The appeal be dismissed. 2. The appellant pay the respondent's costs of the appeal.
3. The proceedings be remitted to the learned judge to make such orders as may be necessary to effect execution of the order for commitment made by him.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY No. VG 272 of 1984
ween
GENERAL DIVISION
BETWEEN : JOSEPH LAZAR
Appellant
TAITO (AUSTRALIA) PTY ~ LIMITED and TAITO
CORPORATION
Respondents
CORAM: FOX, McGREGOR and NEAVES JJ.
DATE: 19 February 1985
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
FOX J.
The facts in this matter, and relevant legal provisions, are set out in the reasons for judgment of Neaves J. and I shall only repeat those necessary to explain these reasons. I agree in general with the judgments of McGregor J. and of Neaves J.,. save that I have reached a different conclusion from that of Neaves J. on the question whether a case was made out respecting the five computerised amusement machines referred to in para. 4 of the
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