Mather v Lockwood Australia Pty Ltd [2001] FCA 1814

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Mather v Lockwood Australia Pty Ltd [2001] FCA 1814 PATENTS – claimed invention relating to lock barrel assembly and key – opposition upheld by Commissioner of Patents – appeal by applicant – whether requirements of novelty and inventiveness clearly not satisfied – whether specification meets requirements of s 40 of Patents Act 1990 – nature of appeal from opposition proceedings – whether patent would clearly be invalid Patents Act 1990 (Cth) ss 7, 18, 40, 59, 60, 104 F. Hoffman La-Roche AG v New England Biolabs Inc [2000] FCA 283 cited Décor Corporation v Dart Industries (1988) 13 IPR 385 cited Leonardis v Sartas (No. 1) Pty Ltd (1996) 67 FCR 126 cited Winner v Ammar Holdings (1993) 25 IPR 273 cited R.D. Werner & Co Inc. v Bailey Aluminium Products Pty Ltd (1989) 13 IPR 513 cited Universal Oil Products Co. v Montsanto Co. (1972) 46 ALJR 658 cited Wellcome Foundation Ltd v VR Laboratories (Aust) Pty Ltd (1981) 148 CLR 262 cited Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co v Beiersdorf (Australia) Ltd (1980) 144 CLR 253 cited Tidy Tea v Unilever (1995) 32 IPR 405 cited SEIJA AULIKKI MATHER v LOCKWOOD AUSTRALIA PTY LTD NG 1000 OF 1997 EMMETT J 20 DECEMBER 2001 SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY NG 1000 OF 1997

BETWEEN: SEIJA AULIKKI MATHER

APPLICANT

AND: LOCKWOOD AUSTRALIA PTY LTD

RESPONDENT

JUDGE: EMMETT J

DATE OF ORDER: 20 DECEMBER 2001

WHERE MADE: SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The appeal be upheld. 2. The decision of the delegate of the Commissioner of Patents dated 13 May 1997 be set aside. 3. In lieu of the decision referred to in Order 2, the decision be that the grounds of opposition raised by the respondent are not made out. 4. The respondent pay the applicant's costs. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.