Bristol Myers-Squibb Co v F H Faulding & Co Ltd [2000] FCA 316

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA Bristol‑Myers Squibb Co v F H Faulding & Co Ltd [2000] FCA 316 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY – patents – petty patents claiming method of administering anti-cancer drug – validity – method of treatment of human body – whether "generally inconvenient" – threshold test of inventiveness – body of knowledge by reference to which inventiveness is to be assessed – whether claimed invention not a "manner of new manufacture" viewed in light of matters disclosed in specifications – inventive step – whether certain matters found to be part of common general knowledge – novelty – paper anticipation – whether mere disclosure, in reports of clinical trials, that invention had been performed sufficient to deprive invention of novelty – whether certain publications directed, recommended or suggested use of invention – fair basing and sufficiency – whether claims travelled beyond matter disclosed in specifications – infringement – contributory infringement by supply of a product – whether supply by respondent of anti-cancer drug together with instructions for use in a manner which would infringe petty patents itself an infringement of petty patents – authorisation to exploit invention – meaning of "authorise" – ancillary liability – procurement of infringement – participation in infringement COURTS AND JUDGES – judicial precedent – ratio decidendi – reasoning not necessary to decision – how far binding WORDS AND PHRASES – "generally inconvenient" – "ratio decidendi" – "invention" – "manner of new manufacture" – "common general knowledge" – "exploit" – "authorise" 21 Jac 1 c 3 (Statute of Monopolies) 1623 (Imp) s 6 Patents Act 1949 (UK) s 41Patents Act 1990 (Cth) ss 7(1), 7(2), 7(3), 13(1), 18(1)(a), 18(1)(b)(i), 18(1)(b)(ii), 40, 117, 138, Schedule 1 Patents Act 1952 (Cth) s 100(d), 100(e) Patents Act 1903 (Cth) Copyright Act 1969 (Cth) s 36 and s 101 Anaesthetic Supplies Pty Ltd v Rescare Ltd (1994) 50 FCR 1 discussed Rescare Ltd v Anaesthetic Supplies Pty Ltd (1992) 25 IPR 119 discussed Darcy v Allin (1601) 72 ER 830 discussed Morgan v Seaward (1837) 150 ER 874 cited C & W's Application for a Patent; In the Matter of (1914) 31 RPC 235 discussed Schering A.G.'s Application [1971] RPC 337 discussed The Wellcome Foundation Limited v Plantext Ltd [1974] RPC 514 cited Eli Lilly & Company's Application [1975] RPC 438 cited The Upjohn Company (Robert's) Application [1977] RPC 94 cited Morton v New York Eye Infirmary 17 F Cas 879 (1862) discussed Brinkenhoff; Ex parte 24 Commissioner's Manuscript Decision 349 (1883); 27 J Pat Off Soc'y discussed Scherer; Ex parte 103 USPQ 107 (1954) cited Joos v Commissioner of Patents (1972) 126 CLR 611 applied Diamond v Chakrabarty 447 US 303 (1980) cited London Jewellers Ltd v Attenborough [1934] 2 KB 206 cited Cheater v Cater [1918] 1 KB 247 referred to Bole v Horton (1673) Vaugh 360 cited Penn-Texas Corporation v Murat Anstalt (No 2) [1964] 2 QB 647 discussed Norway's Application (No 2); In re [1990] 1 AC 723 discussed Fairman v Perpetual Investment Building Society [1923] AC 74 cited Jacobs v London County Council [1950] AC 361 discussed NV Philips Gloeilampenfabrieken v Mirabella International Pty Ltd (1995) 183 CLR 655 discussed and applied Commissioner of Patents v Microcell Ltd (1959) 102 CLR 232 discussed Advanced Building Systems Pty Ltd v Ramset Fasteners (Aust) Pty Ltd (1998) 194 CLR 171 discussed NV Philips Gloeilampenfabrieken v Mirabella International Pty Ltd (1993) 44 FCR 239 discussed R D Werner & Co Inc v Bailey Aluminium Products Pty Ltd (1989) 25 FCR 565 referred to Edison-Bell Phonograph Corp Ltd v Smith (1894) 11 RPC 389 cited Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co v Beiersdorf (Australia) Ltd (1980) 144 CLR 253 cited National Research Development Corporation v Commissioner of Patents (1959) 102 CLR 252 cited CCOM Pty Ltd v Jiejing Pty Ltd (1994) 51 FCR 260 cited Meyers Taylor Pty Ltd v Vicarr Industries Ltd (1977) 137 CLR 228 referred to Nicaro Holdings Pty Ltd v Martin Engineering Co (1990) 91 ALR 513 referred to Hill v Evans (1862) 4 De G F & J 288 applied Flour Oxidising Co Ltd v Carr & Co Ltd (1908) 245 RPC 428 applied Canadian General Electric Co Ltd v Fada Radio Ltd (1930) 47 RPC 69 applied The General Tire & Rubber Co v The Firestone Tyre and Rubber Co Ltd [1972] applied Bristol‑Myers Company (Johnson's) Application [1975] RPC 127 distinguished Leonardis v Sartas No. 1 Pty Ltd (1996) 67 FCR 126 cited Patent Gesellschaft AG v Saudi Livestock Transport and Trading Company (1997) 37 IPR 523 referred to Rehm Pty Ltd v Websters Security Systems (International) Pty Ltd (1988) 81 ALR 79 referred to Olin Corporation v Super Cartridge Co Pty Ltd (1977) 51 ALJR 525 at 527 180 CLR 236 cited Sartas No. 1 Pty Ltd v Koukourou & Partners Pty Ltd (1994) 30 IPR 479 at 495 disapproved Ramset Fasteners (Aust) Pty Ltd v Advanced Building Systems Pty Ltd [1999] FCA 898 cited Walker v Alemite Corporation (1933) 49 CLR 643 cited