| NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION | ..- | -.- .- - . - .e |
| No. | G . 1 3 1 of | 1527 |
;d. DX'JISION
| These proceedings xere commencec! | 27 appllcstion | f l l z c ! |
| m 23 April 1387. | At the directions hearing an 1 May 1?8? | I |
| indicated that the Court | would be able to g1;re a final hearing |
| in tke matter | in eight at nine xeeks time. Tsday I | gi-ien |
| ii=xti:n3 | tkat - A L L ha-Je ths natter rt3t.l; f s r a zxo 13;- f ~ a l |
| hearing ;S comenc'e an 1 :U:;- | 1 9 9 7 . |
| i n I d s t a n c e | and form f r m those that ;till govern the result | sf |
| a | f inal | hear ing. | They d i f f e r i n f o r 3 | i n | that there xas on 1 |
| May no | cross-examination | upon | a f f i d a v i t 3 and | at | the | final |
| hearing | the | ;rifidaPit | material may | be | supplemented | 3r |
| mperseded. The issues | differ | in | substance | because | here | I | m |
| dealing | with | ( a ) the question | of | case acd ( 5 ! | the |
| p e s t i o n of | balsr,ce | o€ | ccnvenience, | not | vith t he | u l t i aa t e |
issues of contravention of ss. S2 and 55 of the Trade Pract ices
Act ancl of gassing-off .
3 .
| domestic) with | an appreciation of their rzle | in the natural |
order, to educate the public (particular17 the young) an the
| role of animals in society, to disseminate information to | make |
owners aware of their responsibilities in the proper care,
| control and support | of their animals, and to support farmers |
| and wild life authorities in | gcod management ;;rcgrammei to |
| ensure proper balance | of animals and preser-Je the ecolc3j-. |
| m e applicant has | a Zurrent mcnberahip 3f | j u s t | o - x r |
| 2000 perscr.3 m 6 | it h s recel*Jed, C r m its | nsnber3 a?.d | frsr?. |
| memb2rs cf t k e general Fu3lit xho | are ccncerned f:r | t k Yelfars |
| of ylimal3, | aver $3 | millicn in l~rjscies | an2 | 1 ; ~ ~ 9 e s : 3 . Thz |
| legacies and bequests come | f r m many | p?oplt nct r?adlly | ~ ? O L T |
| to the applicant | and at prestnt more | xn-mnder3 l2sve k g x i s z |
| than members. | A number of bequest3 | t3 tke apFlicar,t do no; |
;i-Je its full corporate name.
| The | applicant’s | principal | activities | includz | the |
xnduct of ar. animal care centre at West Hoxton. This handles 1avar.ted miIals and hcld3 them until they can ?e plxzd ir.
| iuitakle hom5s. | A t Fresent t h e centrc kas zat3, izgs, | 22r3e5, |
| Zheep. g c a t s | ciucks m d 3esse. | !rot | unexpectedly, tk? main |
| activity at :he centre :cncerns | :at3 ard C393 aci t?xo~gk t k |
| 32plissnt’~ | .dvertistner.ts man? | Feopie *;lsit +.h2 anis31 :ar2 |
| :entre and | o-tain | an aninal if the centrt | has xkat :?.ey | a r e |
| lssk1r.g fzr. The aFplicsnt | 1130 zcnductz -;>.at | is :sllsr! sn |
Q.
| "autreach visitation" programme whereby a suitale animal | LT& |
| trained 0-mer ?isit by arrangement nursing homes | ss as ta |
assist elderly persons otherwise denied access to pets.
| The total staff number of the applicaht i 3 about | 15. |
The principal advertising ur,dertak?n by the applicant i s the televising of 30 and 60 second community service 3nnouncements
| free of charge by three Sydney | televisLon | channels. | The |
| applicant also publishes a | quarter17 jourcsl kncm as t k e | !re= |
| 3outh Xaalss Animal Welfare League | 2ews %X! I shall refer laze: |
| t3 tke material appearing in | that f3u2 for 23rch 1?27. | Z i s |
| jsurnal ha a circulation cf scut 2500. aainly :S r n e n h r s | a?& |
i3 librarin3, includizg 1llc3t 3ikOOi libraries i n !I%% 5;uth IJal ta . The applicant also aci-J-Jerti323 frequcntl; in tke :!ex
| Zouth ??ales advertising pages | sf the montLljr pub l i t a t i cn , | me |
| Au3tralim Lau Journal. |
5 .
| "GA [meaning | Mr | Alexander1 | introduced | Dr H. |
Frederick who advised the meetkg of his esperiences in the formation of a similar group in the US. This group, The Farm Animal Welfare
| Committee | was | formed | in Washingtcn DC |
| approximately five years | ago and was established |
| initially | to | combat | the attack by animal |
rightists on the veal raising industry.
| A | list | of suggested names was circulate6 and |
committee members were individually asked for
opinions.
| There =as | c~nsensus that the name | 3houk l | h |
| simple | and | include | tht zords "hstralia", |
| Welfare Federation of Australia" xas acc5ptel h? | "Federation", "Welfare", md "h ina l " . "Arurnal | ||||
| 311 present. It as tkrougkrt an advantage to | |||||
| |||||
| |||||
| |||||
| Toting at the general neetlng." |
| @.at | then follow in the minutes | i x l z d e s a | 5tatsmer.t | of |
| ob jectives | and | acti-~ities. | Amongst | ac i-~i:ies | are |
| "development of a network | of trained spokespeople tz | present |
the 'Jiews of the Federation and redress trroneous extravagant
| and misleading | statements | about | the | keeping | of animals; |
| provide expert advice | in appropriate cases; presencaticn | t o |
| committees 3f inquiry and | to seek repre~entati~n | X mima: |
| xelfare | 3tatutory | bodies; | soli:it | m C mcnltjr | :~nm.,?ltj. |
| attitudes t o animal xelfare; | ad;.ise member3 cn neasuree | ! z |
| zountcr the activist wing of the | animal rights nc*:er?nt". |
October 1986 - an item appeared in the "Pinanzial P.evitsj".
| =.e | itsn zas hsaded ".b.imal RiTkts Yc-mnent c':eck" | ?.?d | J | |||
|
| that a I??" zrgmisation had | beon fxmed to | keep t k e | x i n a l |
6.
| right3 movement in check. | It said t3at the organization had |
| been convened | by CSIRC) | chief research scientist, Dr George |
| ..Uewnder, | and that the organization aimed | "to see all anisal |
| users get a fair go". | The article reportee that Er AlesulCer |
had said his concern about the snimal rights movement stemmed from personal attacks on scientists who =ern lkensed. to
| conduct experiments on animals. | The item also reported. tkat |
| it vas | ezpected that groups such | as the | National Farsers |
| Federation,. CZIFiO Officers | Ajscciation, | AgricuLturaS | a-d |
| 'J2tcrinary Cnemicsls | Asociation and Zcience Ttackrz :f |
| Australia ;rould be among tbe groups | that zoul0 bcccne merzers. |
| Mr Drummond &rote to the Carpcrats .Uflirs | Ccmizz:cn |
| in 9yL?ey on 24 NcVnmber 1986. | Csrrespondcncs follcKed cnCinq |
| sn 11 March 1937. | Included in the correspondence is a lsttcr |
| Lated 14 January 1987 from the Ccrrpcrate .E'fair3 COEni33~X | to |
| i.lr Drumoncl wfilch states that: |
7 .
| correspondence, that of 11 | March 1987, the Corporate Affairs |
| Commission informed | Mr Drummond that there were no grounds on |
| -xhich the Commission could refuse to register the name | “Ani al |
| Welfare Federation of Australia“. |
| Concurrently with the approaches | t o | the Corporate |
Affairs Commission, Mr Drummond approached the Trade Practices
| Commission. | By | letter to him dated | 24 February 1987 an |
afficer af t5e Trade Practices CoIi~ni33iOn indicated tkat that 3ody would not take any action 83 regards tht .Animal Welfare Federation of Australia.
In additicn, Mr Drummond commenced corresponience x
| 5 February 1987 with officers | of the new hsdy. On 2 4 February |
| 1987 the respondents’ solicitors wrote to | him. He recei-led |
| this letter on 4 March | 1987. | In this letter the rspondents’ |
| 3olicitors said that | an | application had been made to the | !Jew |
South Wales Corporate Affairs Comission for reseriratlon of the name Animal Welfare Federation of Australia Incorporated and tL%t the intention was to register it 3s an as3oc2at1:n
urder the Associations Incorporaticn Act 1934 (:!EN). ?-P
| letter vent on to say that the unincorporated as3ocisticn, | 2s |
| it then xa3, .;as | firsly of the view that | tfie aims and objects |
| sf Mr Drunond’s League xoulC | m t in x y way Le scnfusizg to |
the Fublic or to the media. The lett?r cor.tinued:
S.
| The | AHFA | [meaning | the proposed | FeCsration3 |
| intends to do nothing more | than | provide | an |
| information source to the media and | interested |
| individuals and organizaticns. It | also | intends |
| to apply €or registration | as a charity 5ut 7111 |
not be trading or having any relationship Fith
| conmmers. | The members of the A W A are members |
| of substance | and | reputable | standing | in | the |
community and will be moat concerned to ensure
| that there is | no confusion between your league |
| and the subject federation | and -all1 endeavcur to |
| ensure that there are no activities conducted | 5jr |
| the ANFA which will in any -ay misleac? the public. |
| The letter ccncluded | by stating that the solicitsrs ;:ern | happy |
| to provide Er Zrummond | vit5 a copy of the body's con3titution |
33 submitteC for registration and they cncloseL ~ i t h tCe letter a copy of the application f o r incorpcratix! of the !??deration. TC,e necessarr fcrnalitics for inc3r~zr=tizn kave
| not yet been completed but incorporation under | t?-t 1954 | Act |
| appears to be imminent. |
| In the issue | of the applicant's | mgasine for Ehrch |
| 1387, a full page 3tatement appeared under the heading | ".WIY! |
| ELFARE m m I 9 N OF AVSTRALIA | BExARE THIS XAi. | The |
| statement included tha fo1lot;inr;: |
entertainment and industrial groups that rely on petitioned the Corporate Mfairs Commission to
activities of those other groups.
| seriously | examine | any | approach | for | t e |
registration of the above name and not to approve
it. consider Ne the name to be a
misrepresentation of the aims and objectives of
| the group with welfare | as is generally understood |
| not | being | substantiated. | Unfortunately | the |
| Corporate Affairs Commission is not designed | to |
| determine the rights | of claimants to comgetlng' |
| names | or interests and registration does not |
confer any proprietary rights.
| The newsletter from this organization | 13 said to |
| be an appropriate | forum for, amcngst | other |
| things, | to | counter | the | activist | wing | of | the |
animal rights movement. Our 'hands on' velfare
of unwanted animals is entirely different but yet
ye have names with similar meaning to the general
| publlc. | As we are enjoined to beware cf false |
| prophets so we should also beware | of names cf |
organizations giving the general public a name
| 2hich construes a diiferent | actl*:ity tkar, | ;Ut |
appears to be actually intended or generally
accepted as interpretation of yelfare.
| A news sheet distributed urder the | title | ".bimal |
| Welfare Federation of .%ustralia" and bearing | t5.e date April |
| 1387 stated that Elders Faatoral had agresd | to beccme the |
| major sponsor for the Federation. | It a130 gave details of | a |
"high profile launch" for 8 May 1987 at tle AJC Centre at
| P,md;'ick in Zjrdney. | At the recent Royal Agricultural Sccirty |
| Easter Show in SyCnejr. Elder3 Paztcral had | a stsni, along | ~ i 2 . |
| the applicant. | At | the | Elders | Fastoral | 2:ar.d | ccpies | were |
| distributed | of | this | news | Yheet. | In adtftlsn | &cut | 1 5 2 3 |
| crganizatlons | and | Individuals | have | received | 3 Srachure |
| distributed | early | In | April. This refers to :he afficlal |
| "launch" and "public | f:rum" | to Se conducted ;r. 3 May 1997. |
10.
| The first respondent has deposed in his | affida.r.it |
| that the cspected cost | of this activity is $11,975. It is |
| agreed that this includes the cost | of provision of food and |
| drink. | The Federation, according to the first respondent, has |
| had | considerable difFicultp in arranging for the speakers |
listed in the announcement of the "launch" and it 13 said that if the "launch" is delayed the Federation would have great difficulty in re-organising this activity and woulC not be able to do so for many months. In addition, it is 3ziZ that
| the costs | shich !-dve | already been comaitted | i n relstim |
this activit? would be thrown away.
m e applicant seeks interlocutsr? relief in ttrm of
| 3ub- paragraphs (3) | and ( 5 ) of parsgra~h | 1 zf the A~plicatisn. |
These read as follows:
1. An order, including a? interlocutory srder,
| that the members of the | an;mal Helfare Fcderation |
of Australia ('the FederstLon") be rstrained from
| (a) | in trade or commerce engagizg Fr. my of the activities set cut 1.1 schedule B under the |
name ".9ninul Nelfare FcCcrstim 5,F
.iustralis" or any n m e csntzining c t e ;-or33
"-4nimal Welfare"
| (i) among :he | ztates, vit?dn | a |
Tcrritcry, Sctveen a Ztate ami 3
| Territory or | bet-aeen | t30 |
TerritcrLes, 3r
(ii) to :he ester.: to zhich my zuc.*.
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| te1evi:izn 3rJadcats:. |
11.
| (b) | in trade or commerce engaging in conduct that is liable to mislead the public into | ||
| |||
|
distributed by the Federation 13 published or distribuited by or with permission of the applicant.
| Schedule A | sets out what appears to be a | atatement of the |
| objectives of the | Federation. It 'All be | apparent | that |
~
paragraph l(a)(i) is based on s .52 of the Tradz Practices Act read with 3.6(2)(a) thereof, and that paragraph l(a)(ii) of
| the Application is based on | 3. 52 of the Trade Practices Act |
| read vith 3.6(3) thereof. Counsel indicated | that | paragraph |
| l(b) is baled on 3.55 of the Trade Practices Act. | Final |
| relief is also sought in the accrued juri3diction in | raspect |
| sf pasing-off, but no interlocutory relief | i3 slaimed 22 | t b t |
| faoting. |
| There was Cebate | before me a3 ts xhether | tke |
| applicant | could | bring | the | present | conduct | of | the |
respondents, and apprehended conduct of the respondents and
| the proposed corporation within | the expression in 3.52 and in |
| 5.55, "in trade | or | commerce". | ?.e | point :S | that t h z |
| Parliament may, by using the preFositim "in", :?aye placed | a |
| somewhat 3harper focus upon | wA | activity 3aid tc 3e cf 3 |
| traCing or commercial character than | if Parliament had ksed a |
| phrase such a3 "in relation to" (Fountain | - J . Alexander | ! ?3?1,) |
| 150 CLR 612, Focrri '7. Whiddett (1985) 60 .=P. | '163 at 173) c r 3 |
| phrase such as | "-aith respect t ~ " | !Victcria v. Tke Ccmscnxe3:th |
| (1371) 122 CLR | 252 | at | 2 3 9 - 4 0 0 ) . |
' I
12.
| There was | debate before me also as | to whether the |
| materials identified in paragraph | l(b) of the Application are |
| "goods" within the meaning | of 3.55 of the Trade Practices | Act. |
| It may also | be noted that | 9 .55 is said to be based on the |
| provisions of | the Paris Convention for the Protection | of |
Industrial Property.
| I -as referred in the cour~e | of ~u5mlssion3 upon |
| these matters ta | gloriq *J. | W. | 2nd | P!l?P c2 Pt7 L h i t e . ? |
| !1391! 55 FLR 310. | Regard may also be had to Ec?koq 'J. m |
| West AU3trali3n Cricket Assoclaticq | (1086) 53 .m | 660. m e |
rspondents, 'Jhilst conceding that ordinsr? -xrc!s aay a:quire
| 3econdary meaning and be the occasion far | &cepti-x | cmduct |
| xithin the scope of | s.52 of the Trade Practices Act, pointed |
| to | the | proposition | that, | where organizatlcns Lcar titles |
comprising ordinary words, small differences m? be decizi*Je in egativing contravtntisn of 3.52 (Hornsb? Euitclinq
| Sncormation | Centre | v. S-Tdne? Buildinu Infornation | Cectre |
| : 1 ? 7 3 ) 143 | CLR 116 | at 2 2 ? ) . | I ha-:? | ref$rrec! s1zexhere | tc |
| !?ice GrCwer3 "-Caerati-?c L:,aite,2 | -- | * . | ~:G-:~F.z -.,--a=* | :-L'---- |
| .\U3tr31ia ?+7 LimiteC, | 2 3 December | L?E5, w.reportet! t o | t 4 e |
| nature of interlocutory injunctive relief m t e r 3.8C sf | C,:?? |
| TraCe Practices A c t for contraventions of Part v? | 05 that | 4 z t . |
| I do not now repeat ghat i s there said. | I | 3'-;ulL | cnl;- | 322 |
| that the 3i3h Caurt PAS since coxfirmed t:& | m sn tpplicatlon |
| 3uch as thi3 | it i3 xithi?. | the Csurt'3 discretisx to rsfrair. |
| from attempting to resolve, at this stage, questions | of | law |
| that arise (m | v. | Peko Wallsend Limited (1986) 61 ALJR 5 7 1 . |
I so refrain in this case at this stage.
However, in my view, the applicant has made out its
| case that there are serious questions to be tried | in respect |
| of contraventions of ss. 52 and 55. | On their part, a3 to the |
| balance of convenience, | the | respondents | stressed | ( a ) | the |
| disruption to their activities | that vould follow the grmting |
| 2f the interlocutory relief sought | (b) | the | difficulty in |
| quantifying this harm for | the | purposes of enforcing | any |
| undertaking as to dunages proferred by the applicant, | ar,d | ( c ! |
| the measure | of delay by the applicant | in instituting these |
proceedings in this Court.
| The applicant pointed to its recent | receipt of | the |
| April | newsletter, | but | it has been | clear | at | least | since |
| FeBruary that a new | body with the new name was soon to be |
| launched | and I accept, | on | the | question | of | delay, | the |
respondents' description of %hat happened az in-;ol;ring the applicant seeking to avoid the coming to pasa sf ;hat it now
| asks the Court to enjoin, | by first 2ursuing represcntatixa to |
| the Csrporate Affairs Commission and | t o the Trade Oractlces |
| Commis~ion | anC by | drawing attention to the zituatisn by the |
Ilngthy noticc in the Karch 198? issue of the applicant's jsurnal, (ts xhich I h37e referreef.:.
14.
| It was of course perfectly open to the app1icar.t to approach the matter in this way, but it | did so at the risk, |
now realised, of meeting with a claim of delay when it did come to this Court for interlocutory relief. Counsel for the
| applicant submitted that | an earlier approach to the Court |
| would have been premature. He referred | to Aero~eatiale |
Societie Nationale Industriellc v. Aeroseatiale Htlicccters
| (1986) 65 ALR 477. | However, on my reading of that |
| decision, such | result vould | 57 no | meana necessarily | k a ~ e |
| Pollswed from that decision, | if applie? to | the | c i r c m s t ~ 7 ; e s |
| of this case. |
| In this situation the only interlocutory relief | I |
Yould consider a3 pOS9ibl;r 3aFropriate ;-odd 5e ir, the terms si paragraph l(b) of the Application, but 'Ilth the rider that the respondents may engage in the acti:-itlrs ir. ;;uestkn if
| they sufficiently distinguish their organization from | that of |
| the applicmt. | I appreciate that this use of a qualification |
| or rider will not always be | a appropriatc 3here ~ h t | is |
| invcl-red iz a restraint upon 311 | use of 3 trading stile k i a |
| parti:ula.r | buzineas m d 3 qualificatisn ts | t h : rrztraizt |
| (Qridue SioclcSrokerq | 3 . | Bridqez t 1 9 e 4 ) | LI | FZ? | 460 | at | 4 7 2 : |
| U r | 33ocd P??.auement Lisi c | -7. 2urs=c,z< C33ix %tel | ?-,- |
| 1,irnitA C19353 AT?R | 46,701, a t 45,710; Ch..sa? ?!zkattm | Y:?rz?az |
| rxmratlon | - J . ,%se | Csroora:isn | LiZitee cloe51 | 48,141 |
| 48,156 - 48,157). | Eut 3 restrlcticn cf thiz kin2 q c n 3 |
| particular c1393 c€ acti-zit? | :oulC | ~n the ~rezent sase |
15.
possibljr have been appropriate. I need consider no further the possibility of this form of relief. This is because the
| applicant in address disclaimed | any application for | it. |
| In 9 | event, the early final hearing vhich the Court |
| has been able to give the parties should bring | all matters in |
| dispute to | a prompt resolution. | ||||
|
relief is refused. I would be minded to reserve the questisn
of costs €or the hearing if that is appr6priate.
| ?he application for interlocutory relief is | refusecl |
and costs are reserved.
| I certify that this and the fourteen | (14) |
| preceding pages are | a true copy of | tine |
Reasons for Judgment of his Honour Mr Justice
Gummow *
Associate:
| Date: | I + |
Counsel and Solicitors fcr
Applicant:
and
| Counsel and | Solicitcr~ | for | Mr T.M. | Zxovi : |
| Respondents: | instructed 37 !4essrs Bcdors. |
| Date of Hearing: | 5 May 1987 |
| Date of Judgment: | 5 May 1257 |
- AGLC
- The Animal Welfare League v Alexander, G. [1987] FCA 254
- Case
- [1987] FCA 254
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issues before the court were whether the respondents' activities and the use of the disputed name constituted misleading or deceptive conduct under the Trade Practices Act and whether the Animal Welfare League was entitled to interlocutory injunctive relief. The court found that there were serious questions to be tried regarding potential contraventions of the Trade Practices Act, but it refrained from resolving these questions at the interlocutory stage. The court also considered the balance of convenience, noting the respondents' potential disruption and the applicant's delay in instituting proceedings. Ultimately, the court refused interlocutory relief, stating that the matter should be resolved promptly at the final hearing. The application for interlocutory relief was thus refused, and the question of costs was reserved.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.