White SW Computer Law
Intellectual Property, Information Technology & Telecommunications Lawyers
Melbourne Office - PO Box 452, COLLINS STREET WEST Victoria 8007 Australia
Sydney Office - GPO Box 2506, SYDNEY New South Wales 2001 Australia
Telephone: Melbourne Office - +61 3 9629 3709 Sydney Office - +61 2 9233 2600
Facsimile: Melbourne Office - +61 3 9629 3217 Sydney Office - +61 2 9233 3044
Email: wcl@computerlaw.com.au Internet: http://www.computerlaw.com.au

User Tools

Site Tools


aavisis

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
aavisis [2011/10/28 18:04]
steve
aavisis [2017/07/30 18:02] (current)
Line 12: Line 12:
 The companies had entered into an agreement under the terms of which each participant was, amongst other things, prevented from directly or indirectly carrying on any business which was the same as the Dubsat Business or which involves the exploitation of technology which is similar to or which achieves similar effects as the technology being developed or commercialised by the Dubsat Business, if they had not obtained the written consent of the other participants. The companies had entered into an agreement under the terms of which each participant was, amongst other things, prevented from directly or indirectly carrying on any business which was the same as the Dubsat Business or which involves the exploitation of technology which is similar to or which achieves similar effects as the technology being developed or commercialised by the Dubsat Business, if they had not obtained the written consent of the other participants.
  
-The court has to consider the burden that the granting or refusal to grant such an injunction will place on the parties involved. The court will consider issues such as: \\+The court has to consider the burden that the granting or refusal to grant such an injunction will place on the parties involved. The court will consider issues such as:
   * whether the applicant(s) will suffer irreparable harm if the injunction is not granted;   * whether the applicant(s) will suffer irreparable harm if the injunction is not granted;
   * whether damages will be an adequate remedy for the breach of the agreement;   * whether damages will be an adequate remedy for the breach of the agreement;
Line 32: Line 32:
 If a restraint of trade clause is too wide, the court may decide to sever that clause from the agreement leaving no restriction in place. ​ If a restraint of trade clause is too wide, the court may decide to sever that clause from the agreement leaving no restriction in place. ​
  
-As a result, you will often see restraint of trade clauses that contain a variety of restraint levels, with the aim that the court may only strike out part of the clause. However, each party should assume the worst case situation will prevail and carefully tailor their activities so as not to infringe their obligations under the agreement.+As a result, you will often see restraint of trade clauses that contain a variety of restraint levels, with the aim that the court may only strike out part of the clause. ​ 
 + 
 +However, each party should assume the worst case situation will prevail and carefully tailor their activities so as not to infringe their obligations under the agreement.
  
 AAV Australia Pty Ltd ( "​AAV"​ ) and Omnilab Pty Ltd ( "​Omnilab"​ ) claimed that ISIS Broadcast Media Pty Ltd ( "​ISIS"​ ) continued to distribute dubs of television commercials in breach of the agreement. ​ AAV Australia Pty Ltd ( "​AAV"​ ) and Omnilab Pty Ltd ( "​Omnilab"​ ) claimed that ISIS Broadcast Media Pty Ltd ( "​ISIS"​ ) continued to distribute dubs of television commercials in breach of the agreement. ​
  
 AAV and Omnilab requested that the court grant an injunction to prevent the ongoing activities of ISIS. The purpose of such an injunction is to preserve the status quo between the parties until the dispute has gone to trial. AAV and Omnilab requested that the court grant an injunction to prevent the ongoing activities of ISIS. The purpose of such an injunction is to preserve the status quo between the parties until the dispute has gone to trial.

  © White SW Computer Law 1994-2019. ABN 94 669 684 644. All Rights Reserved.
  Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation
  This website is a guide only and should not be used as a substitute for proper legal advice.
  Readers should make their own enquiries and seek appropriate legal advice.
  For legal advice please email wcl@computerlaw.com.au