Archives for: ‘Kim O’Connell’

Australia signs Free Trade Agreement with China – important implications for IP owners and healthcare providers

After years of negotiation and months of drafting, Australia signed the Free Trade Agreement between the Government of Australia and the Government of the People’s Republic of China (ChAFTA). The Agreement addresses a number of important IP related issues and also sets out bilateral obligations to promote trade and investment in healthcare. Intellectual Property Chapter 11 of the ChAFTA aims …

Read More

Cyber resilience health check

Data breaches and cybercrime are regularly occurring in Australia.  PricewaterhouseCooper’s Global State of Information Security Survey 2015, which surveyed more than 9,700 security, IT and business executives stated that the total number of cybersecurity incidents in 2014 was 42.8 million – an increase of 48% from 2013. ASIC, APRA and the Office of the Australian Information Commission have all signalled …

Read More
Subjects:

Blindsided on prior use

A recent decision of the Full Court of the Federal Court reaffirms that not every prior use of an invention will be novelty defeating (see Damorgold Pty Ltd v JAI Products Pty Ltd [2015] FCAFC 31). Damorgold’s patent related to a spring assisted mechanism for controlling blinds. JAI briefly marketed (but did not sell) a RolaShades product in Australia which possessed …

Read More
Subjects:

Extension of time provisions in the Patents Act cannot prevent “the Sword of Damocles” from falling

The Full Federal Court in Sunesis Pharmaceuticals Inc v Commissioner of Patents [2015] FCAFC 29 clarified that section 223(2) of the Patents Act, which allows the Commissioner of Patents to grant an extension of time to complete a required act, cannot be used to delay the effects of the commencement of legislative amendments. Specifically, the Court found that section 223 …

Read More
Subjects:

More lessons on patent amendment

6 years after our “Lessons about patent amendment” post the Federal Court has handed down another decision in the same proceeding (Apotex v Les Laboratories Servier (No 4) [2015] FCA) about amending a patent under s 105 of the Patents Act. The patent at the centre of these proceedings relates to Servier’s blood pressure medication, perindopril. This time the Court …

Read More
Subjects:

Court rejects ACCC claim against Pfizer

The Federal Court has today dismissed a case brought by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) against Pfizer Australia for alleged misuse of market power and exclusive dealing. The case arose from Pfizer’s sale of its own generic artorvastatin (Lipitor) product to pharmacies. Pfizer’s patent which prevented generic entry into the artorvastatin market expired in May 2012. Prior to patent expiry, Pfizer’s …

Read More
Subjects: |

High Court grants Application for Special Leave to Appeal in Myriad Genetics

The High Court has granted Cancer Voices’ application for special leave to appeal a Full Federal Court finding that Myriad’s patent relating to the BRCA1 gene is patentable.

Read More
Subjects:

Licensees beware – are you exclusive?

The Full Federal Court confirmed last week in BMS v Apotex that where a patent licence reserves some rights to be exercised by the licensor, the licensee will not have standing to sue and claim damages as an “exclusive licensee”. Importantly, in infringement proceedings, a patentee can only claim damages for damage suffered by itself or an exclusive licensee. In …

Read More
Subjects:

ACCC grants interim authorisation of Medicines Australia’s Code of Conduct

In October this year we posted on the ACCC’s draft determination on the new edition 18 of Medicines Australia’s Code of Conduct (see more here). As readers of our blog might recall, the ACCC indicated that it would not grant approval to the new edition of the Code unless certain amendments were made to increase transparency regarding gifts and benefits …

Read More

Page 4 of 21« First...«23456»1020...Last »