Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia Novartis AG v Pharmacor Pty Limited [2022] FCAFC 58 Appeal from: Application for leave to appeal from interlocutory order of primary judge made on 22 March 2022 in proceeding NSD 183 of 2021
File number: NSD 208 of 2022
Judgment of: YATES, BEACH AND MOSHINSKY JJ
Date of judgment: 4 April 2022
Date of publication of reasons: 8 April 2022
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for leave to appeal – patent litigation – where respondent/cross-claimant below filed expert evidence from one neurologist – where applicants/cross-respondents below filed expert evidence from four neurologists – where, at a case management hearing, docket judge excluded the evidence of two of the applicants' neurologists and excluded the non-factual evidence of one of the applicants' neurologists – whether decision of primary judge attended by sufficient doubt to warrant reconsideration by Full Court – whether substantial injustice would result if leave were refused – application for leave refused
Legislation: Evidence Act 1995 (Cth), ss 79, 192A Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), Pt VB Federal Court Rules 2011, r 5.04
Cases cited: AstraZeneca AB v Apotex Pty Ltd (2015) 257 CLR 356 Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd (2019) 139 ACSR 52 Decor Corporation Pty Ltd v Dart Industries Inc (1991) 33 FCR 397 Novartis AG v FH Faulding & Co Ltd [2004] FCAFC 254
Division: General Division
Registry: New South Wales
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