Summary
Four tribunals and the Trademarks Office issue ten decisions, including two head noted and seven worked examples, highlighting key legal principles. A significant guardianship case in Queensland raises questions about the jurisdiction of orders when individuals move interstate. The Western Australia tribunal clarifies that while a Queensland guardianship order retains its effect, it cannot be reviewed unless explicitly stated in the law. The tribunal appoints the woman's mother as a limited guardian, emphasizing the importance of cultural appropriateness in decision-making.
In a trademark ruling, a solar parts business is denied registration for the name "PV Connections," which the registrar finds too descriptive of the goods sold. The decision underscores that merely trading under a name for years does not guarantee its distinctiveness, particularly if it describes the products.
Additionally, three worked examples from New South Wales address access to information and costs, focusing on the limits of excluded information and the criteria for rejecting repeat applications. A case from Victoria discusses the tribunal's discretion in planning permits, emphasizing the need to adhere to specific permit triggers. Overall, the discussions highlight the complexities of legal frameworks and the importance of understanding jurisdictional nuances in various cases.
Show Notes
Send us Fan Mail Four tribunals and the Trade Marks Office, ten decisions in the Tribunals edition of Thursday 22 October 2026, two with headnotes. Why Western Australia's tribunal could not review a recognised Queensland guardianship order but could appoint a guardian for a woman who had made her home in the west; why a solar business could not register its own trading name; and four worked examples on access to information, privilege, costs appeals and permit triggers. Tribunals Desk: an in...
More from The Petal: Australian Case Law Daily from JADE OpenLaw
Send us Fan Mail Edition twelve — what the error changed, 8 to 21 October, appellate decisions only, deduped against edition eleven and the daily brief. Court after court asked a party who had found a mistake to show what it changed: a tribunal member's past association with an expert, a misclassified stated case question, a dividend sweep against the directors' duty of care, an appeal that ran a different case, and a judge who asked a great many questions. Then seven criminal appeals across ...
Send us Fan Mail Twelve decisions from three courts in the New South Wales edition of Thursday 22 October 2026, four of them headnoted. In a bank's institutional negligence case over a scam transfer, discovery of what the bank knew is confined to institutional knowledge up to the transaction date, and the customer must plead, looking forward, the procedure the bank should have had before broader categories can be framed. An all reasonable endeavours obligation to relet requires no steps when ...
Send us Fan Mail Twelve decisions in the Federal Courts edition for Thursday 22 October 2026: one from the Full Court of the Federal Court and eleven from the Federal Court of Australia, three with Judicial Ledger headnotes. The opening story: the remedies judgment in Epic Games v Apple, where the Court held that the s 80 injunction power can restrain otherwise lawful conduct with a sufficient nexus to a contravention, and that relief against a global platform, though the Act reaches conduct ...
Send us Fan Mail Eight headnoted appellate decisions from five courts in the edition of Thursday 22 October 2026, with the Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia and Victoria editions of the same day folded in. The home invasion extension of self-defence and a drug that relaxes; consent to a lawyer's removal from the roll; grounds that were never in a judicial review application; identity discovery and the desire to sue; amending a class action group costs order; judicial review that ...
Send us Fan Mail The Petal's New Zealand edition for Thursday 22 October 2026 carries 18 decisions newly reported from the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal and the High Court. Nine at desk length: why the Crown could not fund the Māori Wardens around the councils the Act puts in control; a Crown proposal to five iwi that created no legitimate expectation; no third category of lawyer misconduct; a Calderbank offer on the eve of filing; a liquidation stayed on a paid debt; pleading a portfoli...