Sandvik Intellectual Property AB v Quarry Mining & Construction Equipment Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 236

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Sandvik Intellectual Property AB v Quarry Mining & Construction Equipment Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 236 File number: VID 259 of 2013

Judge: JESSUP J

Date of judgment: 11 March 2016

Catchwords: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY – Patents – Novelty – Prior use – Whether established on the facts – Whether system included all integers of claim – Whether system unlikely to have been viable by reference to absence of features not part of claim. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY – Patents – Inventive step – Whether system obvious to a person skilled in the relevant art in the light of common general knowledge – Whether invention would not have been obvious because, as claimed, it would not have been viable in practice – Claim embodying internal notional alternatives – Whether invention obvious in respect of one but not another alternative. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY – Patents – Best method known to inventors – Clarity of diagram in specification picked up by claim – Patentee designing and developing own apparatus showing better method than that described in specification – Whether best method disclosed. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY – Patents – Whether invention useful. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY – Patents – Infringement – System patent – Instruction and inducement by supply of products – Belief that end users would use products as claimed – Whether supplier liable as joint tortfeasor – Necessity for primary infringement by use of system. COMPETITION AND CONSUMER LAW – Whether promotion and sale of goods in the absence of a warning as to patent infringement by use as intended misleading and deceptive conduct.