Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd v Global Gaming Supplies Pty Ltd (No 2)

The case involved Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd and its related entities suing Global Gaming Supplies Pty Ltd and others for copyright and trademark infringement, and passing off. The Federal Court of Australia was tasked with determining the allocation of costs between the parties after a series of proceedings and appeals. The primary legal issue was the apportionment of costs in a case of mixed results, where the plaintiffs had some success but not across all claims, and the defendants had some success but not across all defenses.

The court considered the principle that while the usual order is for a successful party to have its costs on a party-party basis, success or failure on particular issues may lead the court to apportion costs. The court applied the principle that the question of costs should be looked at realistically, focusing on which party has won and which has lost. The court found that while the Aristocrat Companies had to initiate court action against Mr. Allam due to his denial of involvement in infringing transactions, Mr. Allam could not be considered successful in the copyright case. The court held that the Aristocrat Companies were entitled to their costs, subject to apportionment to reflect the parties’ success or failure on various issues. Given the substantial evidence and findings against Mr. Allam, the court decided that Mr. Allam should pay 35% of the costs of the proceeding (other than the remittal proceedings), while the Aristocrat Companies would pay Mr. Allam's costs of the remittal proceedings.

The court also addressed a subsidiary issue regarding a previous costs order against Tonita Enterprises Pty Ltd, noting that it could not now alter that order as it had been appealed. The court suggested that the issue should be resolved between the parties.