Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
B. Braun Melsungen AG v Multigate Medical Devices Pty Ltd [2014] FCA 1110 Citation: B. Braun Melsungen AG v Multigate Medical Devices Pty Ltd [2014] FCA 1110
Parties: B. BRAUN MELSUNGEN AG and B. BRAUN AUSTRALIA PTY LTD (ACN 002 945 155) v MULTIGATE MEDICAL DEVICES PTY LTD (ACN 132 290 058); MULTIGATE MEDICAL DEVICES PTY LTD (ACN 132 290 058); B. BRAUN MELSUNGEN AG and B. BRAUN AUSTRALIA PTY LTD (ACN 002 945 155)
File number: VID 463 of 2013
Judge: PAGONE J
Date of judgment: 17 October 2014
Catchwords: PATENTS – patents for safety IV catheters – infringement – "pith and marrow" principle – whether alleged infringing items disclose all essential features of claims in suit – construction of claims – validity of patents – whether invention novel – priority date of patents – whether claims fairly based on matter disclosed by ancestors – whether real and reasonably clear disclosure of claimed invention in body of specification – whether invention sufficiently described in specification.
Legislation: Civil Disputes Resolution Act 2011 (Cth) Evidence Act 1995 (Cth), s 79(1) Patents Act 1990 (Cth), ss 7, 18(1), 40, 43, 79B, 119, 123, 128, 129, 138 Patents Regulations 1991 (Cth), reg 3.12
Cases cited: Arrow Pharmaceuticals Ltd (2006) 154 FCR 31 Australian Mud Company Pty Ltd v Coretell Pty Ltd (2011) 93 IPR 188 Azuko Pty Ltd v Old Digger Pty Ltd (2001) 52 IPR 75 Bitech Engineering v Garth Living Pty Ltd (2010) 86 IPR 468 Bristol Myers Squibb Co v F H Faulding & Co Ltd (2000) 97 FCR 524 C Van Der Lely NV v Bamfords Ltd (1961) 1A IPR 86 Catnic Components Ltd v Hill & Smith Ltd [1982] RPC 183 CCOM Pty Ltd v Jiejing Pty Ltd (1994) 51 FCR 260 Clark v Adie (1877) 2 App Cas 315 Commonwealth Industrial Gases Ltd v MWA Holdings Pty Ltd (1970) 180 CLR 160 Danisco A/S v Novozymes A/S (No 2) (2011) 91 IPR 209 F Hoffman-La Roche & Co Aktiengesellschaft v Commissioner of Patents (1971) 123 CLR 529 Fresenius Medical Care Australia Pty Ltd v Gambro Pty Ltd (2005) 224 ALR 168 GlaxoSmithKline Australia Pty Ltd v Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare (UK) Limited (2013) 305 ALR 363 H Lundbeck A/S v Alphapharm Pty Ltd (2009) 177 FCR 151 Hill v Evans (1862) 45 ER 1195 JMVB Enterprises Pty Ltd v Camoflag Pty Ltd (2005) 67 IPR 68 Kimberly-Clark Australia Pty Ltd v Arico Trading International Pty Ltd (2001) 207 CLR 1 Kinabalu Investments Pty Ltd v Barron & Rawson Pty Ltd [2008] FCAFC 178 Leonardis v Sartas No 1 Pty Ltd (1996) 67 FCR 126 Lockwood Security Products Pty Ltd v Doric Products Pty Ltd (2004) 217 CLR 274 Martin v Scribal Pty Ltd (1954) 92 CLR 17 Mechanical Services (Trailer Engineers) Ltd v Avon Rubber Co Ltd [1977] RPC 66 Merck & Co Inc v DÉcor Corporation Pty Ltd v Dart Industries Inc (1988) 13 IPR 385 Meyers Taylor Pty Ltd v Vicarr Industries Ltd (1977) 137 CLR 228 Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co v Beiersdorf (Australia) Ltd (1980) 144 CLR 253 Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co v Tyco Electrics Pty Ltd (2001) 53 IPR 32 Nicaro Holdings Pty Ltd v Martin Engineering Co (1990) 91 ALR 513 Olin Corp v Super Cartridge Co Pty Ltd (1977) 180 CLR 236 PAC Mining v Esco Corporation (2009) 80 IPR 1 Pfizer Overseas Pharmaceuticals v Eli Lilly & Co (2005) 225 ALR 416 Populin v HB Nominees Pty Ltd (1982) 41 ALR 471 Radiation Ltd v Galliers and Klaerr Pty Ltd (1938) 60 CLR 36 Re Imperial Chemical Industries Ltd (Clark's) Application [1969] RPC 574 Re Mond Nickel Co Ltd's Application [1956] RPC 189 Rehm Pty Ltd v Webster Security System (International) Pty Ltd (1988) 81 ALR 79 RGC Mineral Sands Pty Ltd v Wimmera Industrial Minerals Pty Ltd (1998) 89 FCR 458 Root Quality Pty Ltd v Root Control Technologies Pty Ltd (2000) 177 ALR 231 Sachtler GmbH & Co KG v RE Miller Pty Ltd (2005) 221 ALR 373 Sigma Pharmaceuticals (Australia) Pty Ltd v Wyeth [2011] FCAFC 132 SociÉtÉ des Usines Chimiques RhÔne-Poulenc v Commissioner of Patents (1958) 100 CLR 5 Universal Oil Products Co v Monsanto Co (1972) 46 ALJR 658 Vehicle Monitoring Systems Pty Ltd v SARB Management Group Pty Ltd (2013) 101 IPR 496 Welch Perrin and Co Pty Ltd v Worrel (1961) 106 CLR 588
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