FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Australian Olympic Committee Inc v Calder [2000] FCA 943
AUSTRALIAN OLYMPIC COMMITTEE INC v ALAN ARCHIBALD CALDER
N 603 of 2000SACKVILLE J
12 JULY 2000
SYDNEY
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
N 603 OF 2000
BETWEEN:
AUSTRALIAN OLYMPIC COMMITTEE INC
APPLICANTAND:
ALAN ARCHIBALD CALDER
RESPONDENTJUDGE:
SACKVILLE J
DATE OF ORDER:
12 JULY 2000
WHERE MADE:
SYDNEY
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The time for lodging of an appeal from the decision of the delegate of the Registrar of Trade Marks, in relation to Trade Marks application 775469(39) filed in the name of Alan Archibald Calder, be extended until 4 pm on 14 July 2000.
2. The solicitors for the applicant pay the respondent’s costs of the motion, as taxed or agreed.
Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY
N 603 OF 2000
BETWEEN:
AUSTRALIAN OLYMPIC COMMITTEE INC
APPLICANTAND:
ALAN ARCHIBALD CALDER
RESPONDENT
JUDGE:
SACKVILLE J
DATE:
12 JULY 2000
PLACE:
SYDNEY
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
The Application
This is an application by the Australian Olympic Committee Inc (“AOC”), made pursuant to Federal Court Rules (“FCR”) O 58, r 4(3), to extend the time for the filing of a notice of appeal from a decision of a delegate of the Registrar of Trade Marks given on 14 April 2000. By that decision, the Registrar’s delegate directed that an application by Alan Archibald Calder (the respondent to the application in this Court) to register a trade mark in respect of travel arrangements and tours in class 39 of Schedule 1 to the Trade Marks Regulations, proceed to registration. Mr Calder’s application had been opposed by the AOC on the ground that the mark was deceptively similar to the Olympic symbol, an outline of which is set out in the Schedule to the Olympic Insignia Protection Act 1987 (Cth). By s 5(1) of that Act the AOC is taken to be the owner of the copyright in the Olympic symbol.
FCR O 58 provides for an appeal from a decision of the Registrar of Trade Marks. Any such appeal must be instituted within twenty-one days after the date of the decision appealed from or within such further time as the Court, on application, fixes: O 58 r 4(2). FCR O 58 r 4(3) provides as follows:
“Application may be made to the Court to extend the time for filing, by notice of motion:
(a)made at any time – unless a law of the Commonwealth provides otherwise; and
(b)supported by affidavit showing special circumstances.”
No Commonwealth law “provides otherwise” for the purposes of FCR O 58 r 4(3).
The Course of Events
The AOC’s solicitors, Browne & Co, were notified of the delegate’s decision by a letter dated 14 April 2000 which, for some reason, was not received by them until 19 April 2000. The…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Australian Olympic Committee Inc v Calder and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2000] FCA 943
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue was whether the AOC had demonstrated sufficient grounds for an extension of time to appeal the Registrar’s decision. The AOC argued that they had not received timely notification of the Registrar’s decision and that this delay was beyond their control. They further contended that they had acted with reasonable diligence in pursuing the appeal. The Court needed to assess the AOC's evidence and arguments to determine whether these circumstances warranted an extension of time.
The Court found that the AOC had provided sufficient evidence to support their claim that they were not notified of the Registrar’s decision in a timely manner and that this delay was beyond their control. The AOC had acted with reasonable diligence in attempting to contact the Registrar and in pursuing the appeal once they were aware of the decision. The Court was satisfied that the AOC had met the threshold for an extension of time and granted the application, extending the time until 4 pm on 14 July 2000. The Court also ordered that the AOC’s solicitors pay the respondent’s costs of the motion.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The time for lodging of an appeal from the decision of the delegate of the Registrar of Trade Marks, in relation to Trade Marks application 775469(39) filed in the name of Alan Archibald Calder, be extended until 4 pm on 14 July 2000.
2. The solicitors for the applicant pay the respondent’s costs of the motion, as taxed or agreed.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Established by: SACKVILLE J
Full text does not contain this section.