Baxendale’s Vineyard Pty Ltd v The Geographical Indications Committee [2007] FCA 22

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Baxendale's Vineyard Pty Ltd v The Geographical Indications Committee [2007] FCA 22 PRACTICE – Federal Court Rules 1979 (Cth), O 53 r 1, O 53 r 2(2), O 53 r 2(3) – appeal from decision of AAT – determination of "appropriate registry" where appeal from matter heard in multiple states TRANSFER OF PROCEEDINGS – whether proceedings instituted in a Registry to suit convenience of counsel or solicitors – where no real connection with that Registry – consideration of "proper place" Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975 (Cth) Australian Wine and Brandy Corporation Act 1980 (Cth) Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), s 48 Federal Court Rules, O 10 r 1(2)(f) and O 53 r 2(3) Australian Telecommunications Corporation v Lambroglon (1990) 12 AAR 515 followed Hadid v Lenfest Communications Inc (1996) 70 FCR 403 considered E v Australian Red Cross Society (1991) 27 FCR 310 cited Martin v Abbott Australasia Ltd [1981] 2 NSWLR 430 applied Melbourne & Metropolitan Board of Works v Bevelon Investments Pty Ltd (1977) VR 473 applied South Australia v Victoria (1911) 12 CLR 667 cited Philip Morris Inc v Adam P Brown Male Fashions Pty Ltd (1981) 148 CLR 457 cited National Mutual Holdings Pty Ltd v Sentry Corporation (1988) 19 FCR 155 cited BAXENDALE'S VINEYARD PTY LTD, JAMES GOLDIE BAXENDALE, WILLIAM JAMES HARDIE, JOHN LOVE AND ANDREW D WRIGHT v THE GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS COMMITTEE AND KING VALLEY VIGNERONS INC SAD 259 OF 2006

MANSFIELD J

25 JANUARY 2007

ADELAIDE IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SOUTH AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY SAD 259 OF 2006

BETWEEN: BAXENDALE'S VINEYARD PTY LTD, JAMES GOLDIE BAXENDALE, WILLIAM JAMES HARDIE, JOHN LOVE AND ANDREW D WRIGHT

Applicants

AND: THE GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS COMMITTEE

First Respondent

KING VALLEY VIGNERONS INC