Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Procter & Gamble Australia Pty Limited v Energizer Pty Limited (No 2) [2011] FCA 1446 Citation: Procter & Gamble Australia Pty Limited v Energizer Pty Limited (No 2) [2011] FCA 1446
Parties: PROCTER & GAMBLE AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED (ACN 008 396 245) v ENERGIZER AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED (ACN 003 539 026)
File number: NSD 121 of 2011
Judge: BENNETT J
Date of judgment: 16 December 2011
Catchwords: TRADE PRACTICES – contravention of ss 18(1) and 29(1)(g) of Australian Consumer Law – whether to grant injunction COSTS – apportionment of costs
Legislation: Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth), Schedule 2 (Australian Consumer Law) ss 18(1), 29(1)(g), 232
Cases cited: Dodds Family Investments Pty Ltd (formerly Solar Tint Pty Ltd) v Lane Industries Pty Ltd (Solar Tint case) (1993) 26 IPR 261 applied Luxottica Retail Australia Pty Ltd v Specsavers Pty Ltd (2010) 267 ALR 721 distinguished National Auto Glass Supplies (Australia) Pty Ltd v Nielsen & Moller Autoglass (NSW) Pty Ltd (No 9) [2007] FCA 1826 applied Procter & Gamble Australia Pty Limited v Energizer Pty Limited [2011] FCA 1347 cited
Date of hearing: Determined on the papers
Place: Sydney
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 24
Counsel for the Applicant: Mr S Robb QC with Mr T Breakspear
Solicitor for the Applicant: Colin Biggers & Paisley
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr J Hennessy SC
Solicitor for the Respondent: Gilbert + Tobin
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