Old Digger Pty Ltd v Azuko Pty Ltd [2000] FCA 676

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Old Digger Pty Ltd v Azuko Pty Ltd [2000] FCA 676 Patents – infringement – whether respondents' product infringed the express words of the claims -–whether it took the substance of the invention – whether differences relied on by the respondents were minor variations in the invention of no mechanical significance. Patents – revocation – invalidity – whether invention lacked novelty having regard to the prior art base and prior information – whether prior publications of other patent specifications anticipated the invention – whether prior claiming – whether there had been prior use of the invention by the inventor and by others before the priority date – whether receipt of orders by the inventor before the priority date from a third party under an obligation to keep the invention confidential to purchase the commercial embodiment of the invention constituted a use of the invention – whether manufacture of several commercial quality assemblies embodying the invention in a period of less than one month between field trials and filing of the provisional specification constituted part of the reasonable trial of the invention – whether invention obvious – whether complete specification described the invention fully – whether patent obtained by false suggestion – whether invention useful. Patents Act 1952 (Cth), ss 40, 100(1)(f), 100(1)(h), 100(1)(k) Patents Act 1990 (Cth), ss 7(2), 18(1)(c), 138(3)(c), 138(3)(d), 233(4), 234(5) Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co v Beiersdorf (Aust) Ltd (1980) 29 ALR 29 applied Radiation Limited v Galliers and Klaerr Pty Ltd (1938) 60 CLR 36 applied Commonwealth Industrial Gases Limited v M W A Holdings Pty Ltd (1970) 180 CLR 160 applied Populin v HB Nominees Pty Ltd (1982) 41 ALR 471 cited Nesbit Evans Group Australia Pty Ltd v Impro Limited (1997) 39 IPR 56 cited Catnic Components Limited v Hill & Smith Limited [1982] RPC 183 cited Decore Corp Pty Ltd v Dart Industries Inc (1988) 13 IPR 385 applied Raleigh Cycle Co Ltd v Miller and Co Ltd (1948) 65 RPC 141 cited Utilux Pty Ltd v AMP Inc (1974) 48 ALJR 17 cited Rehm Pty Ltd v Websters Security Systems (International) Pty Ltd (1988) 11 IPR 281 cited NV Philips Gloeilampenfabrieken v Mirabella International Pty Ltd (1993) 26 IPR 513 applied Nicaro Holdings Pty Ltd & Others v Martin Engineering Co & Another (1990) 91 ALR 513 applied Kromschröder (G.) A.G.'s Patent [1960] RPC 75 discussed Daikin Kogyo Co Ltd (Shingu's) Application [1974] RPC 559 discussed Merck and Co (Macek's) Patent [1967] RPC 157 distinguished Wilkinson Sword Limited's Application [1970] RPC 42 distinguished Ethyl Corp (Cook's) Patent [1970] RPC 227 distinguished Alcatel NV v Commissioner of Patents (1996) 35 IPR 255 cited Stanway Oyster Cylinders Pty Ltd v Marks (1996) 35 IPR 71 applied Fomento Industrial SA, Biro Swan Ltd & Anor v Mentmore Manufacturing Co Ltd [1956] RPC 87 applied Melbourne v Terry Fluid Controls Pty Ltd (1993) 26 IPR 292 applied Montecatini Edison SpA v Eastman Kodak Co (1971) 45 ALJR 593 cited Monsanto Co (Brignac's) Application [1971] RPC 153 applied Boyce v Morris Motors Limited (1926) 43 RPC 105 cited Re Wheatley's Patent Application (1984) 2 IPR 450 distinguished Hudson, Scott and Sons Limited v Barringer, Wallis and Manners Limited (1906) 23 RPC 79 applied International Paint Co Ltd's Application [1982] RPC 247 cited Harrison v Project & Design Co (Redcar) Ltd [1978] FSR 81 applied Non-Drip Measure Co Ltd v Stranger's Limited (1943) 60 RPC 135 considered Wellcome Foundation Limited v V R Laboratories (Aust) Pty Ltd (1981) 148 CLR 262 cited W R Grace & Co v Asahi Kasei Kogyo Kabuschiki Kaisha (1993) 25 IPR 481 cited Genetics Institute Inc v Kirin-Amgen Inc (No 3) (1998) 41 IPR 325 applied Patent Gesellschaft AG v Saudi Livestock Transport and Trading Company (1997) 37 IPR 523 applied No-Fume Ltd v Frank Pitchford & Co Ltd (1935) 52 RPC 231 cited Interlego AG v Toltoys Pty Ltd (1973) 130 CLR 461 cited