Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Lockwood Security Products Pty Ltd v Australian Lock Company Pty Ltd
[2005] FCA 203
DESIGNS – determination of questions relating to standing prior to trial – where registered designs for key blanks being challenged by competitor – whether party who is a competitor is a person aggrieved for purposes of s 39 of the Designs Act 1906 (Cth) – whether party a person interested for purposes of s 28 of the Designs Act 1906 (Cth) – whether economic interests sufficient to grant standing.
WORDS & PHRASES – 'person interested', 'person aggrieved' Designs Act 1906 (Cth): ss 28, 39
Allan v Transurban City Link Ltd (2001) 208 CLR 167, applied Alphapharm Pty Ltd v SmithKline Beecham (Australia) Pty Ltd (1994) 49 FCR 250, applied Attorney General of the Gambia v N'Jai [1961] AC 617, cited Australian Conservation Foundation v Commonwealth of Australia (1980) 146 CLR 493, applied Australian Institute of Marine and Power Engineers v Department of Transport (1986) 13 FCR 124, applied Bateman's Bay Local Aboriginal Land Council v The Aboriginal Community Benefit Fund Pty Ltd (1998) 194 CLR 247, cited Big Country Developments Pty Ltd v Australian Community Pharmacy Authority (1995) 60 FCR 85, applied Boots Company (Australia) Pty Ltd v SmithKline Beecham Healthcare Pty Ltd (1996) 65 FCR at 287-289, referred to Broadbridge v Stammers (1987) 16 FCR 296, referred to Campomar v Nike International (2000) 202 CLR 45, cited Conrol Pty Ltd v Meco McCallum Pty Ltd & Ors (1996) 34 IPR 517, cited Firmagroup Australia Pty Ltd v Byrne & Davidson Doors (Vic) Pty Ltd (1987) 180 CLR 483, cited Hosokawa Micron International Inc v Fortune (1990) 26 FCR 393, cited In Re Wolanski's Registered Design (1953) 88 CLR 278, cited Kraft Foods Inc v Gaines Pet Foods Corporation (1996) 65 FCR 104, referred to Le May v Welch (1884) 28 Ch D 24, referred to Loveridge v Pharmacy Restructuring Authority (1995) 39 ALD 103, considered Lufft v Weiss (1946) 73 CLR 119, referred to Macrae Knitting Mills Ltd v Lowes Ltd (1936) 55 CLR 725, referred to North Coast Environment Council Inc v Minister for Resources (1994) 55 FCR 492, referred to Ogle v Strickland (1987) 13 FCR 306, applied Onus v Alcoa (1981) 149 CLR 27, applied Phillips v Habro Rubber Co (1918) 35 RPC 276, referred to Rayjon Properties Pty Ltd v Department of Housing, Local Government and Planning (Qld) [1995] 2 QdR 559, considered Re Albion Hat & Cap Company Pty Ltd (1991) 21 IPR 558, referred to Re Benjamin Israelachvilis' Application (1955) 72 RPC 1, referred to Re Caron International's Design Application [1981] RPC 179, referred to Re Radnall's Registered Design (1934) 51 RPC 164, considered Shop Distributive and Allied Employees Association v Minister for Industrial Affairs (1995) 183 CLR 552, referred to SmithKline Beecham (Australia) Pty Ltd v Chipman [2002] FCA 674, referred to The Ritz Hotel Ltd v Charles of The Ritz Ltd (1988) 12 IPR 417, considered Woolly Bull Enterprises Pty Ltd v Reynolds (2001) 107 FCR 166, cited
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