WORLD TRADE IP/N/6/AUS/1
16September 1997
ORGANIZATION(97-3661)
Original: English Council forTrade-Related Aspects
ofIntellectual Property Rights
CHECKLIST OFISSUES ONENFORCEMENT1
Responses from Australia
I. RESPONSES TOTHE CHECKLIST
Civil andAdministrative Procedures andRemedies
(a)Civiljudicial procedures andremedies
1. Specify thecourts which have jurisdiction overIPRinfringement cases.
Under thePatents, Trade Marks andDesigns Acts, theFederal Court ofAustralia andthe
Australian StateandTerritory Supreme Courts havejurisdiction overmatters arising under theseActs.
UndertheCopyrightAct,theFederalCourt,oranyothercourtofcompetentjurisdiction,hasjurisdiction
overmatters arising under thatAct.
Appeals fromtheFederal Court ortheSupreme Courts areheard bythefullbench oftheFederal
Court or,ifspecial leave isgranted, bytheHigh Court ofAustralia.
2. Which persons havestanding toassert IPRs? How maytheyberepresented? Arethere
requirements formandatory personal appearances before thecourt bytheright holder?
Infringement actions maybeinstituted byacopyright owner, exclusive licensee orperformer
under theCopyright Act,bythepatent owner orexclusive licensee under thePatents Act,thetrademark
owner orauthorized userunder theTrademarks Actorthedesign owner under theDesigns Act.
Businesses andindividuals areentitled tobe,andusually are,represented bysolicitors and
barristers inlegal actions toassert IPRs. Anindividual mayrepresent themselves. There isno
requirement fortherightholder toappear incourt ifnotcalled togiveevidence.
3. What authority dothejudicial authorities have toorder, attherequest oftheopposing
party, aparty toaproceeding toproduce evidence which lieswithin itscontrol?
Thecourts havetheauthority toorder theproduction ofdocuments incourt aspartoftheir
inherent orstatutory powers. Provisions alsoexistinseveral oftheintellectual property actswhich
restate theauthority. Forexample s.122(2) ofthePatents Act1990 states thatontheapplication of
either party, thecourt maymake suchorder fortheinspection ofanything inoronanyvehicle, vessel,
1Document IP/C/5.IP/N/6/AUS/1
Page2
aircraft orpremises, andmayimpose suchterms andgivesuchdirections about theinspection, asthe
court thinks fit.Orders fordiscovery areusedfrequently incivilproceedings including inIPRmatters.
4. What means exist toidentify andprotect confidential information brought forward as
evidence?
Byvirtue ofthecourts ’powers, aparty isentitled toobtain answers tointerrogatories (written
questions) andtoinspect (bydiscovery) alldocuments which arenotprivileged. Confidentiality is
protected bythefollowing:
- aparty required toproduce documents oranswer interrogatories mayonlyproduce
documents oranswer questions which arerelevant totheproceedings;
- courts haveadiscretion tolimitinterrogatories, order thataperson isnotrequired to
answer interrogatories ortorefuse toorder theproduction ofdocuments which contain
secret orconfidential information;
- therightofinspection ofdocuments maybelimited bythecourts topersons suchas
legalrepresentatives orexperts.
Courts canrequire documents which areclaimed tobeprivileged orconfidential tobeproduced
tothecourt tobeidentified assuch.
Formore detail, seeAustralia 'sanswers tothequestions oftheUSconcerning protection of
confidential information (question 6)aspartofthereview oflegislation onpatents, layout-designs of
integratedcircuits,undisclosedinformationandcontrolofanti-competitivepracticesincontractuallicences
intheTRIPS Council inMay1997.2
5. Describe theremedies thatmaybeordered bythejudicial authorities andcriteria, legislative
orjurisprudential, fortheir use:
- injunctions;
- damages, including recovery ofprofits andexpenses, including attorney 'sfees;
- destruction orother disposal ofinfringing goods andmaterial/implements fortheir
production;
- anyother remedies.
Under theprovisions oftheCopyright Act,Patents Act,theTrade Marks ActandtheDesigns
Act,andunder theirgeneral jurisdiction, thecourts maygrant relief forinfringement intheform of
aninterlocutory orpermanent injunction and,attheoption oftheplaintiff, either damages oranaccount
ofprofits. Under theirgeneral jurisdiction thecourts havethepowers toorder aparty topaythelegal
costs ofanother party.
Thecourts apply therulethattheymaygrant aninterlocutory injunction ifthecourt decides
thatthereisaserious issuetobetried; iftheriskofdamage totheplaintiff iftheinjunction isnotgranted
2Theresponse toinitial question 6from theUnited States canbefound indocument IP/C/W/66/Add.1. Afullrecord
ofthequestions posed toAustralia andtheanswers given inthereview inquestion willbecirculated induecourse inthe
IP/Q3/- document series.IP/N/6/AUS/1
Page3
outweighs theriskofdamage tothedefendant iftheinjunction isgranted; andiftheplaintiff gives
anundertaking tocompensate thedefendant iftheinjunction islaterfound bythecourt tobeunjustified.
Apermanent injunction maybegranted where theplaintiff establishes infringement.
Provision ismade intheCopyright, Patents, Trade Marks andDesigns Actsfortheaward of
damages forinfringement. Thecourts havewidepowers toaward damages, oriftheplaintiff prefers,
anaccount ofprofits. Under theCopyright Act,theplaintiff cannot beawarded damages inthecase
ofinnocent infringement butisstillentitled toanaccount ofprofits. Damages usually include the
recovery ofcommercial losses associated withtheinfringement andanaward ofdamages would normally
beaccompanied byanorder forpayment ofall,oraproportion of,thelegalandcourt costs arising
from thecase.
Provisions oftheCopyright Act,andtheTrade Marks Actallow fortheseizure ofinfringing
goods orcopies, and(inthecaseoftheCopyright Act)theequipment usedformaking them, anddelivery
ofthegoods, copies orequipment totherightowner, theexclusive licensee ortheperformer, ortheir
destruction. There isalsoaprovision fordisposal offorfeited goods orcopies bytheAustralian Customs
Service. Specific provision fordelivery upisnotincluded intheDesigns orPatents Acts. However,
thecourts haveaninherent (orstatutory) equitable power toorder defendants todeliver upgoods made
incontravention oftheplaintiff 'srights. TheTrade Marks Actmakes itanoffence tomanufacture
orpossess adie,etc.,foruseinthecommission ofatrademark offence.
TheCopyright andDesigns Actsprovide fortheconversion anddetention ofinfringing goods.
Thatis,thecopyright owner isentitled totreattheinfringing articles andarticles usedtomake them
ashis/her own. Thisprovision isbeing amended intheCopyright Acttomake theremedy discretionary.
Ithasbeenrecommended thattheprovision beremoved fromtheDesigns Act.Theremedy mayonly
beusedwhen theinfringement wasclearly withknowledge ofinfringement onthepartoftheinfringer.
Separately, theCopyright Actpermits application foranaward ofadditional damages anditsamount
istobedetermined bythecourt onitsassessment oftheflagrancy ofthecopyright infringement.
TheTrade Marks Actprovides forthecourt todirect thedisposal ofcounterfeit goods which
havebeenseized bytheAustralian Customs Service. Under theCopyright Act,ifthecourt directs
thatcopiesareforfeitedtotheCommonwealth,thecopiesmustbedisposedofasprescribedbyregulations
orastheComptroller ofCustoms directs.
6. Inwhat circumstances, ifany, dojudicial authorities have theauthority toorder the
infringer toinform theright holder oftheidentity ofthethird persons involved inthe
production anddistribution ofthegoods orservices found tobeinfringing andoftheir
channels ofdistribution?
Thecourts haveinherent andstatutory authority todirect thedefendant toprovide information
inresponse toquestions putbytheplaintiff. Under s.143(1) oftheTrade Marks ActtheComptroller
oftheAustralian Customs Service mayasktheimporter oragent oftheimporter toproduce documents
relating tothegoods ortogiveinformation about thename andaddress oftheperson bywhom, or
towhom, thegoods were consigned.
7. Describe provisions relating totheindemnification ofthedefendants wrongfully enjoined.
Towhat extent arepublic authorities and/or officials liable insuchasituation andwhat
"remedial measures" areapplicable tothem?
TheCopyright, Patents, Trade Marks andDesigns Actsallow thatdamages andaninjunction
maybesought forgroundless threats oflegalproceedings.IP/N/6/AUS/1
Page4
Aninterlocutory injunction istypically granted onlyiftheplaintiff gives anundertaking asto
damages. Ifitisdecided attrialthattheinjunction hasbeenwrongly ordered, thecourt mayorder
theunsuccessful plaintiff topaydamages tothedefendant fromtheundertaking. Ifthedetermination
thataninjunction waswrongly ordered wasmade onappeal, theappeal court would havethegeneral
power tomake anorder forcosts infavour oftheparty enjoined.
Ifanobviously unfounded action iscommenced against aperson, andifthatperson suffers
injury, theperson maybring anaction and,ifsuccessful, receive damages forabuse ofprocess. Also,
theCopyright, Trade Marks, Patents andDesigns Actsprovide that,inacasearising from aborder
seizure, ifacourt decides thatthere wasnotaninfringement byimportation andthatthedefendant
hassuffered damage byreason oftheseizure, thecourt mayorder theobjector totheimportation (the
plaintiff intheaction), topaycompensation fordamages arising sincetheproceedings werecommenced.
Under theCopyright andTrade Marks Acts, theCommonwealth isnotliable forlossordamage
suffered byaperson because oftheseizure, failure toseize, ortherelease ofcopies orgoods. Alegal
practitioner orpatent attorney isnotliable toproceedings foractions doneinhisorherprofessional
capacity onbehalf ofaclient. Disciplinary measures doexistiftheaction contravened thecodeof
professional conduct. Additionally, officials maybesuedintheirpersonal capacity iftheiractions
were nottaken ingood faithinpursuance oftheirstatutory responsibilities oriftaken without legal
authority. Asamatter ofpractice theGovernment willindemnify officials iftheiraction wastaken
ingood faithinfulfilment oftheirduties.
8. Describe provisions governing thelength andcostofproceedings. Provide anyavailable
dataontheactual duration ofproceedings andtheir cost.
Thecostandlength ofacourt caseorlegalproceedings depend onthenature oftheindividual
caseandthejurisdiction inwhich thecaseisheard. Consequently, thecostandduration vary
considerably andaredifficult toquantify.
(b) Administrative procedures andremedies
9. Reply totheabove questions inrelation toanyadministrative procedures onthemerits
andremedies thatmayresult from these procedures.
Australia 'sCopyright, Patents, Trade Marks andDesigns Actsdonothaveprovisions for
administrative procedures thatdealwithmerits orremedies inrespect ofinfringement. Under the
Patents, Trade Marks orDesigns Acts, anappeal onamatter oflawagainst adecision ofthe
Commissioner orSecretary under oneofthose Acts must bemade toacourt. Administrative
determinations arerelated toregistration rather thaninfringement.
Provisional Measures
(a) Judicial measures
10. Describe thetypes ofprovisional measures thatjudicial authorities mayorder, andthe
legal basis forsuchauthority.
Pre-trial injunctions ororders thatmaybegranted bythecourts include interlocutory injunctions,
Mareva injunctions andAnton Piller orders. Thelegalbasis forinjunctions isoutlined inanswer to
question 5.Theinjunctions areinitiated onapplication bytheplaintiff toacourt ofcompetent
jurisdiction.IP/N/6/AUS/1
Page5
TheMareva injunction andtheAnton Piller order wereestablished through precedent inEnglish
caselaw.TheMareva injunction isintended toprevent anymovement ofthedefendant 'sassets before
thecourt'sdecision which would circumvent thecourt awarding damages. Mareva injunctions may
begranted bythecourtiftheplaintiff 'scasewould otherwise beprejudiced andifitisjustandconvenient
todoso,considering theinterests ofboththeplaintiff andthedefendant. Anton Piller orders allow
theplaintiff tosearch thedefendant 'spremises fordocuments orevidence which would demonstrate
theinfringement. Suchanorder would begranted ifthere wereanextremely strong prima faciecase,
thepotential damage totheplaintiff were serious, andifthere were arealpossibility thatthegoods
orcopies would otherwise bedestroyed bythedefendant. Arange ofconditions ontheexecution of
theorder andsubsequent dealings withmaterial seized areusedtoprevent possible injustice tothe
potential defendant.
Except inthecaseofaninterim injunction which restrains thedefendant untilaparticular time,
injunctions operate untiltrialorfurther order.
Allthese orders derive either fromthecourts 'equitable jurisdiction orfromexpress statutory
authority.
11. Inwhat circumstances maysuchmeasures beordered inaudita altera parte?
Byitsnature theAnton Piller order maybeordered exparte. Incases ofurgency, aninjunction
maybegranted exparte.Such orders innearly every caserequire thatthematter bereturned tothe
court forfurther hearing ataspecified date.
12. Describe themain procedures fortheinitiation, ordering andmaintenance inforce of
provisional measures, inparticular relevant time-limits andsafeguards toprotect the
legitimate interests ofthedefendant.
Seetheanswer toquestion 10.Generally, thecourts arereluctant tousethistypeofmeasure,
especially theMareva injunctions andAnton Piller orders. Theorders usually require theattendance
oftheplaintiff 'ssolicitor, limited butsome notice oftheattendance onthepremises ofthirdparties
andprovision fordisputed documents (e.g.where there isaclaim thedocuments areprivileged from
production suchasthose heldbysolicitors forlitigation purposes) tobeidentified andheldseparately
forlatercourt determination oftheirstatus.
13. Describe theprovisions governing thelength andthecostofproceedings. Provide any
dataontheactual duration oftheproceedings andtheir cost.
Refer toquestion 8.InAustralia, theusual ruleisthatcosts follow thecause. Thatis,the
successful party obtains anaward ofparty-party costs from theunsuccessful party(ies). Depending
onthecircumstances, thisusual rulewillbevaried either toalsoinclude solicitor-client costs orto
disallow allorpartofthefullclaim. Under theFederal Court Rules, foracasebrought intheFederal
Court, which thejudge finds should havebeencommenced inalower court, thejudge mayrestrict
theparty-party costs payable bythelosing side. Thisruledoesnotextend tovariation oftheaward
ofcompensation damages -onlythelegalcosts.
(b) Administrative measures
14. Reply totheabove questions inrelation toanyadministrative provisional measures.
Anyadministrative provisional measures which relate toborder measures arehandled bythe
Australian Customs Service andaredetailed below.IP/N/6/AUS/1
Page6
Special requirements Related toBorder Measures.
15. Indicate forwhich goods itispossible toapply forthesuspension bythecustoms authorities
oftherelease intofreecirculation, inparticular whether these procedures areavailable
alsoinrespect ofgoods which involve infringements ofintellectual property rights other
thancounterfeit trademark orpirated copyright goods asdefined intheTRIPS Agreement
(footnote toArticle 51). Specify, together withrelevant criteria, anyimports excluded
from theapplication ofsuchprocedures (such asgoods from another member ofacustoms
union, goods intransit ordeminimis imports. Dotheprocedures apply toimports ofgoods
putonthemarket inanother country byorwiththeconsent oftheright holder andto
goods destined forexportation?
Subsection 135(7) oftheCopyright Actallows theAustralian Customs Service toseizeimported
copies ofcopyright material ifanotice ofobjection toimportation ofthecopies hasbeengiven tothe
Comptroller-General ofCustoms. Thematerial thatmustbethesubject ofsuchcopies isworks, sound
recordings, cinematograph films, published editions andrecordings ofbroadcasts. Copies imported
forpersonal useonlyarenotsubject toseizure.
Section 131oftheTrade Marks Actallows theAustralian Customs Service toseize anddeal
withgoods thatareimported intoAustralia ifthegoods infringe, orappear toinfringe, aregistered
trademark. Deminimis imports areexempt from thisprovision.
Neither theDesigns ActnorthePatents Actprovide forCustoms seizure ofinfringing goods.
TheCopyright Actallows fortheinterdiction ofparallel imported copyright material. Some
special provisions existregarding books. Books published since1991andnotfirstpublished inAustralia
(i.e.published within thirty daysoffirstpublication) arenotsubject totheimportation right. Border
procedures arenotavailable inrespect ofexports.
16. Provide adescription ofthemain elements oftheprocedures relating tothesuspension
oftherelease ofgoods bycustoms authorities, inparticular thecompetent authorities
(Article 51),therequirements foranapplication (Article 52)andthevarious requirements
related totheduration ofthesuspension (Article 55).How have Articles 53(Security or
equivalent assurance), 56(indemnification oftheimporter andoftheowner ofthegoods)
and57(right ofinspection andinformation) been implemented?
Under s.132(1) oftheTrade Marks Actands.135(2) oftheCopyright Act,thecompetent
authority istheComptroller (orChief Executive Officer) ofCustoms whoadministers theCustoms
Act1901.
Toinitiate theseizure ofcopies orcounterfeited goods thecopyright owner, exclusive licensee
orthetrademark owner, orauthorised user(theobjector), mustprovide awritten notice ofobjection
toimportation totheComptroller ofCustoms together withanyprescribed documents. Anotice remains
inforce fortwoyears fromthedayonwhich thenotice isgiven. TheComptroller maynotseizecopies
orgoods unless thecopyright owner, exclusive licensee orthetrademark owner orauthorised user
provides asecurity tocover theexpense thatmaybeincurred bytheCommonwealth.
UndertheTradeMarksAct,theComptrollermayseizeinfringinggoodswhicharemanufactured
outside Australia andimported intoAustralia andwhich aresubject tothecontrol oftheCustoms under
theCustoms Act1901. Similarly, under theCopyright Act,theComptroller-General mayseizecopies
ifawritten notice ofobjection hasbeengiven totheComptroller, andifthecopies areimported into
Australia fortrade orsome other purpose which willprejudicially affect theowner ofcopyright.IP/N/6/AUS/1
Page7
Ifgoods haveatrademark that,intheopinion oftheComptroller, isidentical with,ordeceptively
similar to,anotified trademark; andaregoods inaclass forwhich thetrademark isregistered; the
Comptroller must seize thegoods unless satisfied thatthere arenoreasonable grounds forbelieving
thatinfringement hasoccurred.
Once goods orcopies havebeenseized, theComptroller mustgivewritten notice totheobjector
andtheimporter orowner oftheseized copies orgoods which identifies thecopies orgoods andstates
thattheyhavebeenseized.
Under theTrade Marks andCopyright Acts, thenotice mustalsostatethatthegoods orcopies
willbereleased tothedesignated owner orimporter unless theobjector brings anaction forinfringement,
andgives totheComptroller notice inwriting oftheaction, within tenworking daysafterthenotice
or,iftheComptroller extends thatperiod, within theextended period.
Under s.143(1) oftheTrade Marks Act,ifgoods areseized andtheComptroller issatisfied
thattheuseofatrademark isfraudulent, theComptroller mayasktheimporter ofthegoods, oran
agent oftheimporter, toproduce anydocument relating tothegoods; andgiveinformation about the
name andaddress oftheperson bywhom thegoods were consigned toAustralia; andthename and
address oftheperson inAustralia towhom thegoods wereconsigned. Failure tocomply withtherequest
isanoffence punishable, onconviction, byimprisonment foraperiod notexceeding sixmonths.
Ifaninfringement action hasnotbeenstarted within therequired timetheComptroller must
release theseized copies orgoods totheirimporter ordesignated owner. Under theTrade Marks Act,
theComptroller mayrelease theseized goods totheirdesignated owner atanytimebefore theendof
theaction period ifnewinformation hascome tohandafterthegoods wereseized which demonstrates
thatthere arenoreasonable grounds forbelieving thatthenotified trademark wasinfringed andno
action forinfringement hasbeenbrought bythetrademark owner. Under theCopyright Act,the
Comptroller maypermit theobjector orimporter toinspect andremove asample oftheseized copies.
Indeciding theinfringement case,thecourtmayorder thattheseized copies orgoods bereleased
totheirimporter ordesignated owner subject toconditions (ifany)thatthecourt considers fittoimpose;
oritmayorder thattheseized goods beforfeited totheCommonwealth. Under theCopyright and
Trade Marks Acts, ifthecourt decides thatthere wasnoinfringement andthedesignated owner, or
defendant totheinfringement action, suffers lossordamage, theobjector maybeordered topay
compensation.
17. Describe provisions governing thelength andcostofproceedings. Provide anyavailable
dataontheactual duration ofproceedings andtheir cost. How longisthevalidity of
decisions bythecompetent authorities forthesuspension oftherelease ofgoods intofree
circulation?
Therequirements forthetiming ofseizure andinfringement action areoutlined above. The
copyright owner orexclusive licensee, ortrademark owner must bring anaction forinfringement in
relation totheseized copies orgoods, andgivenotice ofittotheComptroller within tenworking days
ofthenotice fromtheComptroller, unless anextension hasbeenobtained. Theextension cannot exceed
tenworking days.
Under theCopyright andTrade Marks Actsif,threeweeks aftertheaction wasbrought, there
isnoorder ofthecourt preventing therelease oftheseized copies orgoods, thentheymustbereleased
bytheComptroller. Ifaninfringement action iscommenced, thecourt mayorder therelease ofthe
seized copies orgoods atanytimeitseesfit.IP/N/6/AUS/1
Page8
18. Arecompetent authorities required toactupon their owninitiative and, ifso,inwhat
circumstances? Arethere anyspecial provisions applicable toexofficio action?
There isnoprovision forexofficio action. Allactions mustbeinitiated bythecopyright owner
orexclusive licensee orbytheowner (orinsome circumstances anauthorised userofatrademark)
oftheindustrial property right. Under theCopyright Act,copies mayonlybeseized ifthecopyright
owner orexclusive licensee gives anotice ofobjection totheimportation ofthecopies. Under the
Trade Marks Act,theComptroller mayonlyseizegoods ifthegoods bearamark identical orsimilar
toatrademark inrelation towhich anotice ofobjection hasbeengiven.
19. Describe theremedies thatthecompetent authorities havetheauthority toorder andany
criteria regulating their use.
TheAustralian Customs Service isnotempowered toorder remedies forinfringement. The
Customs Service canseizeinfringing copies orcounterfeit goods anddispose ofthose copies orgoods
iftheyareforfeited bytheimporter (Copyright Act)orbyadecision ofthecourt. Allremedies are
decided bythecourts.
Criminal Procedures
20. Specify thecourts which have jurisdiction overcriminal actsofinfringement ofIPRs.
TheSupreme Courts oftheAustralian States andTerritories, theFederal Court andtheHigh
Court ofAustralia, and(additionally inthecaseoftheCopyright Act)anyother court ofcompetent
jurisdiction, havejurisdiction overcriminal prosecutions forinfringement ofIPRs. Under thePatents,
Trade Marks andDesigns Acts, prosecutions mustbeinitiated inaStateCourt. Under theCopyright
Act,prosecutions canbeinitiated intheFederal Court oranyother court ofcompetent jurisdiction.
21. Inrespect ofwhich infringements ofwhich intellectual property rights arecriminal
procedures andpenalties available?
Under theCopyright Actthefollowing arecriminal offences:
- making forsaleorhire,commercially importing ordistributing copies forthepurpose
oftrade ortoanyother extent thataffects prejudicially thecopyright owner, knowing
them tobeinfringements;
- being inpossession ofsuchcopies forcommercial purposes;
- being inpossession ofequipment known tobeusedformaking infringing copies;
- causing public performances ofawork, filmorsound recording atapublic venue
knowing theperformance tobeinfringing;
- advertising thesupply ofcopies ofcomputer programs thatareknown tobeinfringing.
CriminalproceduresareavailableundertheTradeMarksActforfalsifyingaregisteredtrademark,
falsely applying aregistered trademark, themanufacture andpossession ofdieetc.foruseincommission
ofanoffence, ortheselling ofgoods withfalsemarks.IP/N/6/AUS/1
Page9
22. Which public authorities areresponsible forinitiating criminal proceedings? Arethey
required todothisontheir owninitiative and/or inresponse tocomplaints?
TheAustralian Federal Police andthepolice forces ofStates andtheNorthern Territory are
responsible forinvestigating suspected offences under theCopyright andTrade Marks Acts, whether
ornotcomplaints havebeenreceived. Thedecision onwhether toprosecute forasuspected offence
isamatter fortheDirector ofPublic Prosecutions orequivalent functionary intheStates orTerritories.
Inpractice, most police action results from complaints andinformation received.
23. Doprivate persons have standing toinitiate criminal proceedings and,ifso,who?
Refer toquestion 22.Private persons caninitiate criminal proceedings, although theprosecution
maybetaken overbytheDirector ofPublic Prosecutions andcontinued ordiscontinued.
24. Specify bycategory ofIPRandtypeofinfringement where necessary, thepenalties and
other remedies thatmaybeimposed:
- imprisonment;
- monetary fines;
- seizure, forfeiture anddestruction ofinfringing goods andmaterial andimplements
fortheir production;
- other.
UndertheCopyrightAct,penaltiesrangefromamaximumfineof$A500forsomefirstoffences
byindividuals toamaximum fineof$A250,000 forasecond orsubsequent offence byacorporation.
Individuals faceamaximum fineof$A50,000. Penalties under theCopyright Actcanalsoinclude
imprisonment forperiods ofbetween sixmonths andfiveyears.
Under theTrade Marks Act,there arecriminal penalties forfalsifying aregistered trademark,
falsely applying aregistered trademark, themanufacture andpossession ofdieetc.foruseincommission
ofanoffence, ortheselling ofgoods withfalsemarks. Thepenalty forthese offences arefinesof
upto$A50,000, imprisonment foraperiod notexceeding twoyears orboth.
Ifcounterfeit goods areforfeited totheCommonwealth, under theTrade Marks Actthegoods
aredisposed ofattheComptroller 'sdirection, orunder theCopyright Act,asprescribed byregulations
orastheComptroller ofCustoms directs.
UndertheCopyrightAct,infringingcopiesorimplementsusedorintendedtobeusedformaking
infringing copies maybeordered tobedestroyed ordelivered uptothecopyright owner orotherwise
dealtwith.
25. Describe provisions governing thelength andanycostofproceedings. Provide anyavailable
dataontheactual duration ofproceedings andtheir cost, ifany.
Again, thecostandduration ofproceedings aredetermined bycourt procedures, thespecific
nature ofeachcaseandthework loadofthecourts inthejurisdiction inwhich thecaseisheard.IP/N/6/AUS/1
Page10
II. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Other legislation/actions available forenforcement ofIPRrights
Inmany cases inwhich acivilaction istaken inrespect ofIPRinfringements theplaintiffs
willalsoargue thatthere hasbeenaninfringement ofoneorother rights under either common law
or,usually, theTrade Practices Act1974 (TPA).
TheTPAisAustralia 'santi-trust legislation. Italsoincludes arange ofconsumer provisions
directed topenalising themaking, intradeorcommerce, offalseormisleading representations aswell
asproscribing, ins.52, misleading ordeceptive conduct.
Theapplication ofthesection hasnowextended intoalmost every realm ofmarket behaviour
inAustralia andthere isanextensive andgrowing bodyofcaselaw. Thebehaviour thatisproscribed
isbehaviour thatiseither misleading ordeceptive orlikely tomislead ordeceive. Thisenables the
court tomake adetermination about whether ornotconduct thathasbeen, orisproposed tobe,engaged
in,isorwould beprohibited under theTPA. Asuccessful action under theTPAisnotdependent on
showing thatthere wasactual deception, orthatpersons wereactually misled, orwhether anyinjury
hasbeenorislikely tobesuffered. Nomalicious intent isrequired -thetestisanobjective one.
"Passing Off"
Suchanaction may, attimes, besimilar totheaction of"passing off"which isavailable under
thecommon lawofAustralia. Theorigins ofpassing offareobscure butinsome respects itemerged
asaspecies ofthegenus oftheaction fordeceit butwiththedifference thatitisallowed tobebrought
notbythecustomer deceived butbythetrader whose goods hadbeenusedtoeffect thedeception.
(SeeBlanchard vHill(1742) 2Atk484;26ER692andCrawshay vThompson (1842) 2ManandG
357;134ER146.124). Anintention bythedefendant todeceive hasnotbeenanecessary ingredient
inthecause ofpassing offsince 1838 (Millington vFox).Themodern basis ofthetortisnowput
squarely asinjury totheplaintiff 'sreputation orbusiness orgoodwill bythedefendant 'sconduct
irrespective ofanyintent todeceive.
Therealquestion iswhether theowner ofthegoods hasestablished asufficient reputation within
thejurisdiction withrespect tohisorhergoods inorder toestablish thereisasufficient levelofconsumer
knowledge oftheproduct andattraction toittoprovide custom which, iflost,would belikely toresult
indamage tohimorher. Ifnoreputation, ornodamage orarealpossibility ofdamage, canbe
established theaction fails.
FairTrading Acts
Anaction under thecommon lawmaybepleaded inrelation toconduct byanytrader. This
isnotthecaseunder theTPA. Because there isnoconstitutional power toenact national legislation
regulating market conduct perse,theTPArelies onavariety ofother constitutional powers within
thejurisdiction ofthenational legislature. Theprimary, though bynomeans thesole,basisuponwhich
federal jurisdiction isattracted isthrough theuseofthenational legislature 'spower tomake laws
regulating trading andfinancial corporations. Where misleading ordeceptive conduct isengaged in
byatrader butthattrader isnotatrading orfinancial corporation, theremaybenoconstitutional basis
fortheapplication oftheTPA. Forthisreason, amongst others, theFederal Government andthe
governments ofthevarious States andTerritories ofAustralia agreed totheenactment ofsubstantially
uniform legislation byeachStateandTerritory. Ineachcasethiscomplementary legislation isknown
astheFairTrading Act.IP/N/6/AUS/1
Page11
Remedies
Remedies under theTPAarelargely co-extensive withthose available under theIPRstatutes.
There arealsosome additional discretions given tothecourts inrelation tothetypes oforders that
maybemade inTPAproceedings. However, remedies ofadditional damages andconversion damages
thatareavailable under, forexample, theCopyright Act,arenotavailable under theTPA. Asto
damages, thenormal ruleisthatthedamages areanestimate ofwhatitwould costtoplace theplaintiff
intheposition theplaintiff would havebeeniniftheinfringement hadnotoccurred. Thatis,thedamages
arecompensatory. Thisisthebasisforpayment ofdamages under theTPAorinanaction forpassing
offorordinary damages under theIPRstatutes. Nevertheless, thisisnotanexact science andbecause
ofthedifficulty invaluation ofdamage caused byinfringing conduct thecourt mayberequired totreat
thedamages asbeing, asitwere, atlarge, anddetermine theamount ofdamage asifitwereajury.
Conclusion
From theforegoing itwillbeapparent thateventhough theTPA operates from adifferent
perspective totheIPRstatutes andcommon lawactions, itprovides averypowerful weapon inthe
hands ofIPRrightowners andforthatreason isusedextensively inIPRlitigation.
Anti-competitive practices inContractual-Licences
TheTPAalsoproscribes certain anti-competitive behaviour. Thisincludes abuse ofmarket
power, unconscionable conduct, third lineforcing andresale price maintenance. Although these
provisions donotgenerally make reference tocontractual arrangements theyareapplicable tocontractual
arrangements astoother forms ofmarket behaviour.3
TheTPAisthemajor statutory mechanism bywhich anti-competitive provisions incontractual
licences maybecontrolled. Itshould benoted, however, thattheTPAprovides specific exclusions
forprovisions incontracts inrelation totheexploitation ofpatents, registered designs, copyright and
layout-designs ofintegrated circuits thatmight otherwise result ininfringements ofcertain provisions
oftheTPA-these being where those arrangements resulted inasubstantial lessening ofcompetition
(thisincludes lessening ofcompetition brought about bycovenants inrelation tocompetition andto
pricing), price discrimination, andexclusive dealing arrangements. These exclusions areintended to
bereviewed within thenexttwoyears.
3There hasbeensome debate about whether resale price maintenance ought tobeproscribed. Thecompetition authorities
have thepower toauthorise resale price maintenance where thepublic benefits outweigh thedetriments.