Warwick Rothnie, who wears a horsehair wig because he’s an Australian barrister, reports what he describes as a “reasoned decision finding that cybersquatting breaches our laws on unfair competition but is probably not trademark infringement.”
Harshest comment made about the defendant: “[Defendant] clearly has no regard for the turth.”
Runner-up: “[Defendant] has a law degree. He is not in the normal case of a self represented litigant who might have no knowledge of the law, albeit that his knowledge of the law might strike one as rather slight for one who holds himself out as an expert in intellectual property.”
Things you learn reading trademark cases: Plaintiff, CSR Sugar, produces 4% of the world’s sugar.
CSR Limited v. Resource Capital Australia Pty Ltd,  FCA 279 (4 April 2003)