The High Court has clarified the meaning of ‘honest’ within the expression ‘honest concurrent use’ as a defence to trade mark infringement1. After Firstmac registered the mark ZIP for financial products, Zip used substantially the same mark for its loan products. It was held that Zip had failed to prove ‘honest concurrent use’. The court noted (at [57]) …
Wollondilly SC v Godfrey [2026] NSWLEC 21
Robson J in this case (at [66-69]) comments on the interpretation of development consents4.
First, ambiguity is to be resolved by application of the ordinary rules as apply to statutes5. Second, no principle of laxity in drafting is conceded to them. Third, nor is ambiguity to be resolved against …
Anderson v Anderson [2026] QCA 50
In this case, it was argued that the trial judge erred in law by considering policy before consulting the text. This was rejected. Brown JA quoted cases for starting with the text and also considering context in the widest sense ‘at the first stage of the process …’
Comment – the requirement to have …
Aguasa v Hunter [2026] WASCA 37
Whether a statutory requirement is procedural or substantive is often difficult to determine10. Various ‘formulations’ of the test to be applied have emerged. Vaughan J said (at [163]), however, that nothing is served by expressing a preference for one formulation over another. Courts in this regard are ‘not offering a dictionary or …
SEPL Pty Ltd v FCT [2026] FCAFC 36
Were three brothers each an ‘employee’ (undefined) for FBT purposes?13 While ‘employee’ might take its common law meaning, subject to context, the court noted (at [25]) that it could take a ‘commercial and trade usage’, its ‘natural and ordinary meaning’, or a meaning peculiar to the specific legislation involved.
Where …
The High Court refused an application by US singer Katy Perry to cancel the clothing trade mark Katie Perry held by an Australian fashion designer1. It was argued that its use by the designer ‘would be likely to deceive or cause confusion’2. This was due to the reputation the singer’s later trade mark Katy Perry had …
Glascott v The King [2026] VSCA 42
The court gave 9 reasons why it could not have been intended that a special hearing on mental competence was invalid for being conducted outside the statutory time limit. The provision said the ‘court must hold a special hearing … within 3 months …’6 The last reason given (at [122-123]) was …
McCallum v Projector Films [2026] FCA 173
After setting out the basics of our ‘modern approach’ from Palmanova, the court (at [150-151]) provided guidance on the proper use of dictionaries.
The court said that ordinary meaning ‘is not necessarily divined from a dictionary’. A ‘familiar difficulty’ is that dictionaries specify a range of meanings (or senses) rather than any …
Chief Commissioner v Gentner [2026] VSCA 22
The court in this case (at [72]) noted that, when selecting between competing interpretations, regard may be had to the consequences of each10. Detective G was charged with a breach of discipline. Another officer later amended the charge, found it proved, and determined that G should be dismissed. The regulation said …
Supaphien v Chaiyabarn [2026] ACTCA 5
A ‘shopping service’ operator was accused of selling a fake Chanel handbag. A social media video later detailed the allegation without naming the person13. She sued for defamation alleging ‘serious harm’14.
One issue was how social media posts are to be understood. The trial judge said that posts are to …
