Archive for November, 2008

Friday, November 21st, 2008

Commissioner’s Decision not Irrelevant on Appeal

The Full Court of the Federal Court has overturned the decision of Jessup J in Sherman v Commissioner of Patents [2008] FCA 1026 previously discussed here.

The Full Court was not persuaded that s160(a) of the Patents Act, which provides that on hearing an appeal against a decision of the Commissioner, the Federal Court may admit further evidence orally, or on affidavit or otherwise, resulted in the evidence before the Commissioner was automatically evidence in the appeal.

However, the Court held that:

Evidence as to the decision of the delegate is relevant on two bases. First, the fact that it was made is a fact on which the jurisdiction of the Court depends … Secondly, the substance of the decision on novelty and inventiveness (considered as a statement of the delegate’s opinion) is a matter that the Court may take into account: see [21] above. This is because the delegate (in contrast to the Court) is credited with having some technical expertise.

Further, as evidence of the Commissioner’s decision is both relevant and admissible, so too is the material upon which that decision was based, including prior art and witness declarations filed during the opposition, because “in order to understand the delegate’s decision, it is necessary to have regard to the material that the delegate thought pertinent to his decision”.

This decision reopens the prospect of the Commissioner playing an important public interest role in proceedings where the opponent decides not to contest an appeal.

Thursday, November 20th, 2008

Film industry launches legal action against ISP over copyright infringements

Several film companies and licensees today initiated proceedings in the Federal Court against iiNet, a major Australian Internet service provider, over its alleged failure to prevent its customers downloading unauthorised copies of films and programs.

See here for a media release.

Thursday, November 13th, 2008

Review 2 Pty Ltd v Redberry Enterprise Pty Ltd

On 5 July 2006 Review 2 Pty Ltd was registered as the owner of Design Registration No. 307708 in relation to ladies garments (“the Review Design”). This case considered whether Redberry Enterprise Pty Ltd (“Redberry”) infringed the Review Design and considered Redberry’s cross-claim that the Review Design was invalid.

Kenny J found that the Review Design was valid but that Redberry had not infringed it. This case reminds us that while a design registration may be found valid, the monopoly conferred by registration can be closely confined by what has been disclosed in the prior art.

Read the Phillips, Ormonde & Fitzpatrickreview of this case here.