Tagged: Case Note

Civil leave to appeal requirement considered

Submission by Helen Tiplady
Kennedy v Shire of Campaspe [2015] VSCA 47
In this recent decision, the Court of Appeal grappled, for the first time, with the test for the grant of leave for an appeal under the new civil appeals regime.

This will hurt you more than me – validity of IV catheter patent upheld

Written by Peter Heerey AM, QC, Tom Cordiner & Alan Nash. In the proceeding B. Braun Melsungen AG v Multigate Medical Devices Pty Ltd [2014] FCA 1110, Pagone J held certain claims of two of B Braun’s patents for safety IV catheters valid and infringed by the conduct of Multigate. Both patents are for a safety needle protecting device for an intravenous catheter. Both claim the priority date of 12 June 1998 through the same chain of intermediate patents.

Discloser of confidential business plan almost misses out on the fruits of its labour

Written by Peter Heerey AM, QC, Tom Cordiner & Alan Nash. Where confidential information about a plan for corporate recapitalisation was disclosed and there was a subsequent development by the recipient and completion of the transaction without further recourse to discloser, the issue at trial was whether elements of confidentiality made out and whether equitable compensation is payable.

ZIMA tomato trade mark far from rotten

Case note written by Peter Heerey AM, QC, Tom Cordiner & Alan Nash. In Mastronardi Produce Ltd v Registrar of Trade Marks [2014] FCA 1021 (19 September 2014) Justice Gordon has overturned a decision of the Registrar to reject the mark ZIMA in respect of tomatoes.

Trade mark owner successfully runs a claim for additional damages up the pole

Written by Peter Heerey AM, QC, Tom Cordiner & Alan Nash. In Vertical Leisure Limited & Anor v Skyrunner Pty Ltd & Anor [2014] FCCA 2033 (5 September 2014), the Federal Circuit Court has extended the record by awarding $300k in additional damages for infringement of Vertical Leisure’s X-POLE mark registered for pole-dancing poles. Vertical Leisure is the Australian and international market leader in respect of such products.

Co-patentees jump the gun in appealing to the AAT

Case note by Peter Heerey AM, QC, Tom Cordiner & Alan Nash: correspondents for South Australia, Victoria and Western Australia
Stylis and Commissioner of Patents [2014] AATA 796 28 October 2014
The Administrative Appeals Tribunal has refused an application to review a particular decision of the Commissioner of Patents on the basis that the AAT lacks jurisdiction to review it.