Federal Court of Australia
JUDGMENT No. val dal Boal a A.Q. IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA )
) NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No NG 811 of 1996 ) GENERAL DIVISION ) BETWEEN: PUREBRED PRODUCTS PTY LTD Applicant AND: E.D ES PTY LTD Respondent Coram: Davies J Place: Sydney Date: 5 December 1996
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
This is an application for an interlocutory injunction. I do not propose to say much about the case. It seems to me to be undesirable for a judge, early in the
litigation, to express views about the matter. What is important at this particular time
is whether or not a holding order should be made.
The product in question, an animal grooming mitt, is a successful and valuable product. It is the subject of Australian letters patent commencing on 22 December 1992 with a priority date of 9 June 1992 ("the patent"). The mitt is used for grooming animals. It has a rubber pad along the palm and along the thumb, the pad having
projections and the rubber being of a soft type which is suitable for extracting hair or
fur from the animal.
The applicant commenced marketing the product in about 1994 and has marketed it successfully. The product has also been sold extensively overseas. The respondent commenced marketing a like product in this country in September of
1996, and did so with knowledge of the patent.
The claim, as presently brought, is for infringement of the patent and for breach of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth). I need not say anything about the claim under the Trade Practices Act save this, that it seems to me that it has not been shown that, apart from the question of infringement, there is any reason why the respondent should not market its product in the manner in which it has in the past
and proposes to market it in the future...
As to the question of infringement, it is not put for the purposes of this present motion that the applicant does not have an arguable case for infringement. What is put is that the patent is incontestably bad. The relevant claim, claim 3, of the patent
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