NSW Caselaw
Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Karlsson v Griffith University [2020] NSWCA 176 Hearing dates: 14 August 2020 Date of orders: 14 August 2020 Decision date: 14 August 2020 Before: Payne and White JJA Decision: Dismiss the summons seeking leave to appeal for want of jurisdiction. Catchwords: COURTS – jurisdiction – appeal requiring leave to appeal from the Common Law Division – Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) – whether appeal lay to Court of Appeal – whether prohibition on instituting and determining appeal other than in a federal court in s 7(5) of Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-vesting) Act 1987 (Cth) applied – whether appeal involved a matter for determination arising under the Trade Marks Act – summons seeking leave to appeal dismissed for want of jurisdiction Legislation Cited: Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth) Jurisdiction of Courts (Cross-vesting) Act 1987 (Cth) Trade Marks Act 1955 (Cth) Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) Cases Cited: Bramco Electronics Pty Ltd v ATF Mining Electrics Proprietary Ltd (2013) 86 NSWLR 115; [2013] NSWCA 392 CGU Insurance Limited v Blakeley (2016) 259 CLR 339; [2016] HCA 2 Cook v Pasminco Ltd (2000) 99 FCR 548; [2000] FCA 677 Eberstaller v Poulos (2014) 87 NSWLR 394; [2014] NSWCA 211 Felton v Mulligan (1971) 124 CLR 367; [1971] HCA 39 Karlsson v Griffith University [2019] NSWSC 1335 Karlsson v Griffith University [2020] NSWSC 365 Morris Finance Ltd v Brown [2016] NSWCA 343 Morris Finance Ltd v Brown (2016) 93 NSWLR 551 R v Commonwealth Court of Conciliation and Arbitration; Ex parte Barrett (1945) 70 CLR 141; [1945] HCA 50 Johnson Tiles Pty Ltd (ACN 004 576 103) v Esso Australia Ltd (2000) 104 FCR 564; [2000] FCA 1572 Woolworths Ltd v Lister [2004] NSWCA 292 Texts Cited: Dennis Pearce, Interpretation Acts in Australia, (1st ed 2018) Mark Davison, Ian Horak, Shanahan's Australian Law of Trade Marks and Passing Off (online ed, 2020) Category: Principal judgment Parties: Annika Karlsson (Applicant) Griffith University (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Plaintiff (in person) T L Hollo (Respondent)
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