EzyDVD P/L v Lahrs Investments Qld P/L

The parties to this appeal are EzyDVD P/L, the appellant, and Lahrs Investments Qld P/L, the respondents. The dispute concerns a franchise agreement for an ‘EzyDVD’ store, which included a restraint of trade clause. After the franchise agreement expired, the respondents opened a different DVD store at the same location as the EzyDVD store, leading the appellant franchisor to seek an injunction to enforce the restraint of trade clause. The appellant argued that the interest sought to be protected by the clause was its intellectual property. The court was required to decide whether the restraint of trade clause was unreasonable and therefore invalid, and whether the trial judge erred in refusing to grant the injunction.

The court considered the nature of the restraint of trade clause and the interest the appellant sought to protect. It held that the clause was valid and reasonable in the context of protecting the appellant's intellectual property. However, the court found that the trial judge did not err in refusing to grant the injunction. The court held that the respondents had not breached the restraint of trade clause, as they had not used the appellant's intellectual property in their new DVD store. The court also found that the appellant had not suffered any loss or damage as a result of the respondents opening the new DVD store.

The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the respondents' costs of the appeal to be assessed. The court granted the appellant leave to amend the notice of appeal in accordance with paragraph 3 of these reasons. The court held that the restraint of trade clause was valid and reasonable, but that the trial judge's decision not to grant the injunction was correct. The court found that the respondents had not breached the clause and that the appellant had not suffered any loss or damage.