Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Brick Lane Brewing Co Pty Ltd v Torquay Beverage Co Pty Ltd [2023] FCA 66 File number: NSD 1342 of 2021
Judgment of: STEWART J
Date of judgment: 8 February 2023
Catchwords: CONSUMER LAW – misleading or deceptive conduct – whether similar get-up of beer products is likely to be misleading or deceptive or has a tendency to lead into error, or represents an association between them – ss 18 and 29 of the Australian Consumer Law – identification of the relevant class of persons – the extent to which the applicant must establish a reputation in its get-up at the relevant date – whether the relevant date is when the respondents first commenced using their similar get-up or whether it is only when their goods first became available for sale – consideration of similarities and differences, in particular the names of the products – the extent to which "thirsty folk want beer, not explanations"
Legislation: Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) s 75B, Sch 1 ss 18, 29 Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) s 76(1)
Cases cited: ACCC v Employsure Pty Ltd [2021] FCAFC 142; 392 ALR 205 ACCC v TPG Internet Pty Ltd [2013] HCA 54; 250 CLR 640 ACCC v TPG Internet Pty Ltd [2020] FCAFC 130; 278 FCR 450 Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd v Darrell Lea Chocolate Shops Pty Ltd [2007] FCA 70; 159 FCR 397 Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd v Pub Squash Co Pty Ltd (1980) 2 NSWLR 851 Campbell v Backoffice Investments Pty Ltd [2009] HCA 25; 238 CLR 30 Campomar Sociedad, Limitada v Nike International Ltd [2000] HCA 12; 202 CLR 45 Hansen Beverage Co v Bickfords [2008] FCA 406; 75 IPR 505 Hashtag Burgers Pty Ltd v In-n-Out Burgers Inc [2020] FCAFC 235; 385 ALR 514 Homart Pharmaceuticals Pty Ltd Careline Australia Pty Ltd [2018] FCAFC 105; 264 FCR 422 Homart Pharmaceuticals Pty Ltd v Caroline Australia Pty Ltd [2017] FCA 403; 349 ALR 598 In-N-Out Burgers Inc v Hashtag Burgers Pty Ltd [2020] FCA 193; 377 ALR 116 Interlego AG v Croner Trading Pty Ltd [1992] FCA 992; 39 FCR 348 Mars Australia Pty Ltd v Sweet Rewards Pty Ltd [2009] FCA 606; 81 IPR 354 Mars Australia Pty Ltd v Sweet Rewards Pty Ltd [2009] FCAFC 174; 84 IPR 12 McWilliam's Wines Pty Ltd v McDonald's System of Australia Pty Ltd [1980] FCA 188; 33 ALR 394 Montgomery v Thompson [1891] AC 217 Natural Raw C Pty Ltd v Maicap Pty Ltd [2023] FCA 51 Norman Kark Publications Ltd v Odhams Press Ltd [1962] 1 WLR 380 Optical 88 Ltd v Optical 88 Pty Ltd (No 2) [2010] FCA 1380; 275 ALR 526 Parkdale Custom Built Furniture v Puxu [1982] HCA 44; 149 CLR 191 Registrar of Trade Marks v Woolworths [1999] FCA 1020; 93 FCR 365 S & I Publishing Pty Ltd v Australian Surf Life Saver Pty Ltd [1998] FCA 1463; 88 FCR 354 State Government Insurance Corporation v Government Insurance Office of New South Wales [1991] FCA 198; 28 FCR 511 Taco Company of Australia Inc v Taco Bell Pty Ltd [1982] FCA 170; 42 ALR 177 Trivago NV v ACCC [2020] FCAFC 185; 384 ALR 496 Verrocchi v Direct Chemist Outlet Pty Ltd [2015] FCA 234 Verrocchi v Direct Chemist Outlet Pty Ltd [2016] FCAFC 104; 247 FCR 570 Woodtree Pty Ltd v Zheng [2007] FCA 1922; 164 FCR 369
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