Pivot Transport Pty Limited Bulkhaul Limited (formerly Polgold Limited)

Pivot Transport Pty Limited sought a declaration and injunctive relief against Bulkhaul Limited, formerly Polgold Limited, claiming that the latter's use of the name "Bulkhaul" for its transport services contravened sections 52, 53(c), and 53(d) of the Trade Practices Act 1974. Pivot argued that Bulkhaul's use of the name "Bulkhaul" was misleading or deceptive, suggesting sponsorship, affiliation, or approval by Pivot, which was incorrect. The case required the court to determine whether Bulkhaul's use of the name "Bulkhaul" constituted misleading or deceptive conduct under the Trade Practices Act and if it amounted to passing off.

The court identified two relevant sections of the public: primary consignors and cartage contractors within a 250 km radius from Narellan, where Bulkhaul Limited operated. The court found that primary consignors were unlikely to be deceived by the name, as they would not entrust work to Bulkhaul Limited believing it to be Pivot's subsidiary. Regarding cartage contractors, the court concluded that any confusion could be easily corrected by appropriate advice from Pivot. The court also held that Bulkhaul Limited's use of the name "Bulkhaul" did not suggest sponsorship, affiliation, or approval by Pivot, and Bulkhaul did not have a distinctive reputation that could lead to deception or misleading.

The court dismissed Pivot's application and ordered Pivot to pay Bulkhaul Limited's costs, including any reserved costs, to be taxed. The reasoning was that Pivot failed to prove that Bulkhaul Limited's use of the name "Bulkhaul" was likely to deceive or mislead the identified sections of the public or that it constituted passing off.