Hadjipanayotis - Application by CHH

The application before Gaudron and Kirby JJ of the High Court of Australia concerned an application by CHH for leave to appeal against a decision of the Full Federal Court. The dispute arose from an application made by Mr Hadjipanayotis to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) for the registration of a company name. ASIC had refused to register the name on the basis that it was identical to a name already registered by CHH. Mr Hadjipanayotis sought judicial review of ASIC's decision, and the Full Federal Court dismissed his appeal.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the Full Federal Court had erred in its interpretation of section 147(1)(a) of the *Corporations Act 2001* (Cth). This section prohibits the registration of a company name that is identical to a name already registered. The question was whether the Full Federal Court had correctly applied this prohibition in circumstances where the applicant sought to register a name that was identical to an existing registered name, despite arguments that the existing registration was itself invalid.

Gaudron and Kirby JJ considered the legislative intent behind section 147(1)(a), which is to prevent confusion and potential deception in the marketplace by ensuring that each registered company name is unique. Their Honours noted that the validity of an existing registration is a separate matter that cannot be challenged indirectly through an application to register an identical name. The Court reasoned that to allow such a challenge would undermine the integrity of the company registration system. Therefore, the Full Federal Court had correctly applied the statutory prohibition by refusing to register the name, irrespective of any potential defects in the prior registration.

Leave to appeal was refused.