Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Sony Computer Entertainment Australia Pty Ltd v Dannoun [2000] FCA 1634
CONTEMPT OF COURT – infringement of registered trade mark in breach of Court order – penalty
Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) s 120 SONY COMPUTER ENTERTAINMENT AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED & ANOR v MOHAMED SAMIR DANNOUN (also known as "Mohamed Dannoun") (also known as "Samir Dannoun") (also known as "Sam Turk") (also known as "Sam Dann") & ANOR LINDGREN J 16 NOVEMBER 2000 SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY N 243 OF 2000
BETWEEN: SONY COMPUTER ENTERTAINMENT AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED (ACN 077 583 183)
FIRST APPLICANT
KABUSHIKI KAISHA SONY COMPUTER ENTERTAINMENT
SECOND APPLICANT
AND: MOHAMED SAMIR DANNOUN (also known as "Mohamed Dannoun") (also known as "Samir Dannoun") (also known as "Sam Turk") (also known as "Sam Dann")
FIRST RESPONDENT
FERNANDO SILVA (also known as "Ferdinand Silva")
SECOND RESPONDENT
JUDGE: LINDGREN J
DATE OF ORDER: 16 NOVEMBER 2000
WHERE MADE: SYDNEY
THE COURT DECLARES THAT: The first respondent committed a contempt of orders numbered 8 and 9 made by the Court on 5 September 2000 by, on 15 October 2000 at a stall at Paddy's Markets, Flemington, without the licence of the second applicant, offering to supply and supplying compact disks containing software: (a) in which are stored electronically representations of marks; and (b) by reference to marks that are substantially identical with the second applicant's registered trade marks "PlayStation" and "PS". THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The first respondent pay by way of penalty a sum of $3,500. 2. The first respondent pay that sum by 31 December 2000. 3. The first respondent pay the applicants' costs of the motion brought by notice of motion filed in Court on 27 October 2000 in so far as they relate to the contempt referred to in the above declaration, on an indemnity basis, that is, all the costs incurred by the applicants of and incidental to the motion except any costs unreasonably incurred and costs unreasonable in amount.
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