Zeitoun v Nokia Corporation

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Zeitoun v Nokia Corporation [2007] FCA 955

ABBAS ZEITOUN v NOKIA CORPORATION
VID467 OF 2007

JESSUP J
27 JUNE 2007
MELBOURNE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	VID467 OF 2007

BETWEEN:	ABBAS ZEITOUN Applicant
AND:	NOKIA CORPORATION Respondent

JUDGE:	JESSUP J
DATE OF ORDER:	27 JUNE 2007
WHERE MADE:	MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The application be dismissed with costs. 

Note:    Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	VID467 OF 2007

BETWEEN:	ABBAS ZEITOUN Applicant
AND:	NOKIA CORPORATION Respondent

JUDGE:	JESSUP J
DATE:	27 JUNE 2007
PLACE:	MELBOURNE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. On 14 June 2006, Kenny J gave summary judgment for the present respondent, Nokia Corporation, against the present applicant, Abbas Zeitoun, and other interests pursuant to O 20 r 1 of the Federal Court Rules.  Her Honour made declarations and injunctions, orders for delivery up, orders for discovery in aid of the calculation of damages and an order in the following terms:

   The respondents and each of them pay the applicant damages for infringement of the Nokia Trade Marks, to be assessed together with interest thereon, or, at the option of the applicant, the respondents and each of them account for the profits made by each of them by the said infringements and pay the applicant the amount found to be due on the taking of such account, together with interest thereon.

   Pursuant to that order, a Registrar of the court assessed the damages payable by the applicant at $35,000, and on 8 May 2007 he issued his certificate to that effect pursuant to O 38 r 2(1) of the Rules. 

2. On 30 May 2007, the applicant filed an application for extension of time to file and serve a Notice of Appeal. That application referred to a judgment of 8 May 2007 as that from which it was desired to appeal. However, there was no judgment of the court on 8 May 2007. Had the applicant wished to challenge the assessment by the Registrar, he would have been required to apply for a review pursuant to s 35A(5) of the Federal Court of Australia Act1976 (Cth) and O 46 r 7B of the Rules. It was clear both from the way in which the applicant presented his case in court and from the terms of his draft Notice of Appeal that he desired only to appeal from the judgment of Kenny J given on 14 June 2006. He requested that his application be understood in that sense, and Mr Goldblatt, who appeared for the respondent, raised no objection to that course.

3. Mr Goldblatt also accepted that, subject to the extension of time which is sought in the present application, the applicant would have an appeal as of right from the judgment of Kenny J. 

4. By O 52 r 15(1) of the Rules, a Notice of Appeal must be filed and served within 21…