Lion mauled by High Court of Australia
An Australian brewing giant has been forced to change the name of an entire beer range after losing a trade mark infringement case in the High Court of Australia brought by a US wine giant. Mmmm, beer. Reminds me of that famous exchange between the then High Court judges and counsel during argument in Joslyn v Berryman (2003) 214 CLR 552; [2003] HCA 34:
CALLINAN J: Mr Jackson, it seems to me that clearly the people at the party, including Ms Joslyn and Mr Berryman, went out with the intention of getting drunk.
MR D F JACKSON QC: It would be a big night, your Honour, big night.
CALLINAN J: With the intention of getting drunk and they fulfilled that intention.
MR JACKSON: Well, your Honour, young people sometimes——
KIRBY J: I just think “drunk” is a label and I am a little worried about—it is not necessary to put that label. It is just that they were sufficiently affected by alcohol to affect their capacity to drive.
MR JACKSON: Yes.
KIRBY J: “A drunk” has all sorts of baggage with it.
HAYNE J: Perhaps “hammered” is the more modern expression, Mr Jackson, or “well and truly hammered”.
MR JACKSON: I am indebted to your Honour.
KIRBY J: I do not know any of these expressions.
McHUGH J: No, no. Justice Hayne must live a very different life to the sort of life we lead.
KIRBY J: I have never heard that word “hammered” before, never. Not before this very minute.
Anyhoo, I digress (and Justices Kirby, McHugh and Callinan have since retired). Back in 2008, US wine company E. & J. Gallo Winery (Gallo) brought Australian brewer Lion Nathan National Foods (Lion Nathan) before the Federal Court of Australia, claiming that Lion Nathan's "Barefoot Radler" brand of beer infringed Gallo Winery's "barefoot" trademark, used by Gallo on a range of budget wines. The Australian Trade Marks Law Blog reported that first instance decision HERE.
Continue Reading...