Lamont v Malishus Limited (No 2)

The appellant, Mr Lamont, sought to appeal against the decision of the primary judge of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia in a trade mark dispute. Mr Lamont was self-represented throughout the proceedings. The respondents to the appeal were Mr Nicholas, Mr Jurcic, Mr Selwyn and Malishus Limited. The primary judge dismissed Mr Lamont's claims against all respondents, finding that he had failed to establish that any of them had engaged in infringing activity in Australia. The primary judge found that Mr Jurcic and Mr Selwyn had infringed three of the asserted trade marks, restrained them from using the trade mark MALISHUS in relation to certain goods, ordered them to pay damages and costs. The primary judge found that Mr Nicholas had not engaged in any infringing activity in Australia. The court considered whether the Federal Circuit Court of Australia erred by denying Mr Lamont a fair hearing and whether it erred in determining that Mr Nicholas' use of the impugned trade mark was not use in Australia.

The court found that Mr Lamont was a literate, intelligent and coherent self-represented litigant. The court found that the Federal Circuit Court of Australia did not err in denying Mr Lamont a fair hearing. The court found that the denial of procedural fairness would have made no difference to the outcome of the proceeding. The court found that the Federal Circuit Court of Australia did not err in determining that Mr Nicholas' use of the impugned trade mark was not use in Australia.

The appeal was dismissed. There was no order as to costs.