Garrett v Make Wine Pty Ltd

The case of Garrett v Make Wine Pty Ltd was heard by the Federal Court of Australia, where the respondents, Make Wine Pty Ltd, VOK Beverages Pty Ltd, and Treasury Wine Estates Vintners Limited, sought summary judgment against the applicant, Andrew Morton Garrett, in relation to his claims of trade mark infringement, breach of contract, and other related matters. The respondents argued that Garrett's claims had no reasonable prospects of success, that he lacked standing, and that his proceedings were vexatious. They also sought a vexatious proceedings order against Garrett pursuant to s 37AO of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth).

The court had to determine whether the respondents' application for summary judgment should be granted, and whether the vexatious proceedings order should be made against Garrett. The court considered the evidence and arguments presented by both parties, including the history of proceedings brought by Garrett and their outcomes. The court noted that Garrett had difficulty confining the factual matters on which he wished to rely in his application, and that his claims involved a complicated factual matrix of events and a multiplicity of proceedings with overlapping claims.

In its reasoning, the court found that Garrett's claims of trade mark infringement had no reasonable prospects of success, as three of the four trade marks in issue were expressly assigned to Mildara Blass in the 2000 Deed, and the fourth trade mark was a composite mark that used Garrett's stylised script signature, which was also transferred to Mildara Blass in the 2000 Deed by way of a perpetual licence. The court also found that Garrett lacked standing to bring his claims, as the findings in previous cases bound him and the third respondent. Furthermore, the court found that Garrett's proceedings were vexatious, as he had instituted numerous proceedings in the past that were dismissed, struck-out, or refused due to being hopelessly misconceived, incoherent, vexatious, or having no reasonable prospect of success.

The court granted the respondents' application for summary judgment and made a vexatious proceedings order against Garrett, prohibiting him from instituting any proceedings in the Federal Court of Australia against the respondents or any related body corporate, employee, agent, or adviser without the leave of the Court. The court also ordered Garrett to pay the respondents' costs of and incidental to the proceeding, including any reserved costs.