Gillette Australia Pty Ltd v Energizer Australia Pty Ltd
| Jurisdiction | Australia Federal only |
| Neutral Citation | [2002] FCAFC 223,2002-0726 FCA A |
| Date | 2002 |
| Year | 2002 |
| Court | Full Federal Court (Australia) |
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
17 cases
- Moss v Lowe Hunt and Partners Pty Ltd
- Specsavers Pty Ltd v the Optical Superstore Pty Ltd (No 2)
- Telstra Corporation Ltd v Singtel Optus Pty Ltd
-
Allergan Australia Pty Ltd v Self Care IP Holdings Pty Ltd
...Fry Consulting Pty Ltd v Sports Warehouse Inc (No 2) [2012] FCA 81; 201 FCR 565 Gillette Australia Pty Ltd v Energiser Australia Pty Ltd [2002] FCAFC 223; 193 ALR 629 Global Sportsman Pty Ltd v Mirror Newspapers Pty Ltd [1984] FCA 167; 2 FCR 82 Google Inc v Australian Competition and Consum......
Get Started for Free
4 firm's commentaries
-
Corporate Law News
...Optus $49 cap plan. However, the court relied on the Full Court's judgement in Gillette Australia Pty Ltd v Energizer Australia Pty Ltd (2002) 193 ALR 629, in which the Full Court concluded that it was open to the advertiser to choose with which product it compared, and to choose the featur......
-
Product Disparagement: Protecting Your Product's Reputation
...like with like) and capable of being substantiated. In the Duracell Bunny Case (Gillette Australia Pty Ltd v Energizer Australia Pty Ltd [2002] FCAFC 223), a Duracell advertisement explicitly compared its own brand of alkaline batteries to Energizer's cheaper, non-alkaline battery - a diffe......
-
Allergan v Self Care IP Holdings: PROTOX ' Not such an alternative
...IP Holdings Pty Ltd [2021] FCAFC 163, [41]. 4 Ibid [43]. 5 Ibid [57]. 6 Ibid. 7 Gillette Australia Pty Ltd v Energizer Australia Pty Ltd [2002] FCAFC 223. 8 Allergan Australia Pty Ltd v Self Care IP Holdings Pty Ltd [2021] FCAFC 163, 9 Ibid [109]. 10 Ibid [113]. The content of this article ......
-
Allergan v Self Care IP Holdings: PROTOX ' Not such an alternative
...IP Holdings Pty Ltd [2021] FCAFC 163, [41]. 4 Ibid [43]. 5 Ibid [57]. 6 Ibid. 7 Gillette Australia Pty Ltd v Energizer Australia Pty Ltd [2002] FCAFC 223. 8 Allergan Australia Pty Ltd v Self Care IP Holdings Pty Ltd [2021] FCAFC 163, 9 Ibid [109]. 10 Ibid [113]. The content of this article ......