Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Globaltech Corporation Pty Ltd v Australian Mud Company Pty Ltd [2019] FCAFC 162 Appeal from: Australian Mud Company Pty Ltd v Globaltech Corporation Pty Ltd [2018] FCA 1839
File number: NSD 98 of 2019
Judges: KENNY, ROBERTSON AND MOSHINSKY JJ
Date of judgment: 13 September 2019
Catchwords: PATENTS – construction – where claims in suit comprised method claims and system claims for core sample orientation – where the method in claim 1 involved two timers, one in the downhole device and one on the surface – whether the primary judge erred in his construction of the patent – whether, on the true construction of claim 1, it required both the downhole timer and the surface timer to count with reference to the same initial reference time – whether the word "beyond" meant no more than "after" or "later than" – appeal dismissed
Legislation: Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Raising the Bar) Act 2012 (Cth) Patents Act 1990 (Cth), s 40 Patents Regulations 1991 (Cth)
Cases cited: Branir Pty Ltd v Owston Nominees (No 2) Pty Ltd (2001) 117 FCR 424 CCOM Pty Ltd v Jiejing Pty Ltd (1994) 51 FCR 260 Davies v Lazer Safe Pty Ltd [2019] FCAFC 65 Dincel Construction System Pty Ltd v AFS Systems Pty Ltd (2018) 360 ALR 273 Fei Yu (t/as Jewels 4 Pools) v Beadcrete Pty Ltd (2014) 107 IPR 516 H Lundbeck A/S v Alphapharm Pty Ltd (2009) 177 FCR 151 Interlego AG v Toltoys Pty Ltd (1973) 130 CLR 461 Jupiters Ltd v Neurizon Pty Ltd (2005) 222 ALR 155 Kimberly-Clark Australia Pty Ltd v Arico Trading International Pty Ltd (2001) 207 CLR 1 Lockwood Security Products Pty Ltd v Doric Products Pty Ltd (2004) 217 CLR 274 Martin v Scribal Pty Ltd (1954) 92 CLR 17 Monsanto Co v Commissioner of Patents (1974) 48 ALJR 59 Nichia Corporation v Arrow Electronics Australia Pty Ltd [2019] FCAFC 2 Ransburg Co v Aerostyle Ltd [1968] RPC 287 Rehm Pty Ltd v Websters Security Systems (International) Pty Ltd (1988) 81 ALR 79 Sigma Pharmaceuticals (Australia) Pty Ltd v Wyeth (2011) 119 IPR 194 Société des Usines Chimiques Rhône-Poulenc v Commissioner of Patents (1958) 100 CLR 5 Welch Perrin & Co Pty Ltd v Worrel (1961) 106 CLR 588
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate