Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
N.V. Sumatra Tobacco Trading Company v British American Tobacco Australia Services Limited (No 2) [2012] FCA 219 Citation: N.V. Sumatra Tobacco Trading Company v British American Tobacco Australia Services Limited (No 2) [2012] FCA 219
Parties: N.V. SUMATRA TOBACCO TRADING COMPANY v BRITISH AMERICAN TOBACCO AUSTRALIA SERVICES LIMITED ACN 004 069 649
File number: QUD 310 of 2011
Judge: COLLIER J
Date of judgment: 13 March 2012
Catchwords: COSTS – whether usual rule that costs follow the event should apply – whether argument abandoned at trial – whether discount in costs payable to successful party justified
Legislation: Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) s 56
Cases cited: ACCC v Australian Safeway Stores Pty Ltd (No 2) [2003] FCAFC 163 cited Décor Corporation Pty Ltd v Dart Industries Inc (1991) 33 FCR 397 cited NV Sumatra Tobacco Trading Company v British American Tobacco Australia Services Ltd [2011] FCA 1228 cited
Date of hearing: 31 October 2011
Date of last submissions: 4, 14, 18 November 2011
Place: Brisbane
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 14
Solicitor for the Applicant: Ms N Braad of Bennett & Philp Lawyers
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr B Le Plastrier
Solicitor for the Respondent: Corrs Chambers Westgarth Lawyers
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION QUD 310 of 2011
BETWEEN: N.V. SUMATRA TOBACCO TRADING COMPANY
Applicant
AND: BRITISH AMERICAN TOBACCO AUSTRALIA SERVICES LIMITED ACN 004 069 649
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