On 18 September 2024, the Honourable Justice Jackman, in his capacity as a Deputy President of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT), granted Sandoz a licence pursuant to section 223(9) of the Patents Act 1990 (Cth) (Act). In doing so, his Honour set aside an earlier, 2019 decision, in which the Commissioner of Patents (Commissioner) had also…
[KEYPOINT]: A historic Federal Court decision says an artificial intelligence system is capable of being named as an “inventor” under the Patents Act 1990, with potentially significant ramifications for technological innovation and the patent system in Australia. In the first judicial determination in the world of its type, the Australian Federal Court has held that…
In a surprising decision, the Federal Court has modified the law of patent term extensions in Australia, by clarifying that it’s only the patentee’s goods that are relevant to the proposed extension – not those of a competitor, even if the competitor’s goods came first and also contain a “pharmaceutical substance per se” that is…
On 5 July 2019, the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia (Full Court) handed down its judgment in the appeal and cross-appeal in Calidad Pty Ltd v Seiko Epson Corporation [2019] FCAFC 115. The judgment considers in-depth the extent to which a patentee can: prevent those who have acquired title to a patented…
Two recent decisions in the UK and Australia in the long-running pregabalin litigations demonstrate the different approaches in these jurisdictions to determine if a patent specification has sufficiently disclosed an invention. Readers will recall that the judgments concerned Warner-Lambert’s Swiss-style claims for the use of the compound pregabalin (marketed as Lyrica) in the treatment of…
On 20 September 2018, the Treasury Laws Amendment (2018 Measures No. 5) Bill 2018 (Bill) was tabled in Australia’s House of Representatives. Among the amendments proposed was the repeal of Section 51(3) of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) (CCA), a change that could significantly impact IP licensing and assignment arrangements within Australia. The…
On 28 March 2018, the Australian Government introduced the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Productivity Commission Response Part 1 and Other Measures) Bill 2018 to the House of Representatives. This follows IP Australia’s public consultation in October 2017 of an exposure draft of amendments for Australia’s IP laws that included, among other matters, a mechanism to phase out the…
On 28 March 2018, the Australian Government introduced the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Productivity Commission Response Part 1 and Other Measures) Bill 2018 in the House of Representatives. This follows IP Australia’s public consultation in October 2017 of an exposure draft of amendments for Australia’s IP laws that included, among other matters, a mechanism to phase out the…
On 23 October 2017, IP Australia released the draft Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Productivity Commission Response Part 1 and Other Measures) Bill 2017 for public comment. The purpose of the Bill is to implement the Government’s response to the Productivity Commission’s recommendations on Australia’s IP Arrangements (our coverage of the Government’s response can be found…
The Productivity Commission released its final report into Australia’s IP arrangements in December 2016 (covered in our post earlier this year, ‘IP Rights vs IP Wrongs’). Now, the Australian Government has weighed in on the Commission’s recommendations, supporting some and ‘noting’ others. With respect to patent law, the Government supports the following recommendations: Add an…
