Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
CQMS Pty Ltd v Bradken Resources Pty Limited [2016] FCA 847 File number: QUD 736 of 2013
Judge: DOWSETT J
Date of judgment: 27 July 2016
Catchwords: PATENTS – claimed invention relating to ground engaging tools – infringement – construction of claims – where no expert evidence from a skilled addressee – meaning of "aperture" – unjustified threat of legal proceedings for infringement – whether genuine steps to resolve a dispute constitute unjustified threats
Legislation: Civil Dispute Resolution Act 2011 (Cth) ss 4, 6, 7, 11, 12, 13 Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) s 136 Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 30.01 Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Raising the Bar) Act 2012 (Cth) Patents Act 1990 (Cth) ss 40, 117, 128, 129, 129A, 130, 131, 132 Patents Act 1952 (Cth) s 121 Patents Act 1903 (Cth) s 91A
Cases cited: Benmax v Austin Motor Coy Ltd (1953) 70 RPC 284 C Van Der Lely NV v Bamfords Limited (1963) 80 RPC 61 Mechanical Services (Trailer Engineers) Ltd v Avon Rubber Co Ltd (1977) 94 RPC 66 Nicaro Holdings Pty Ltd v Martin Engineering Co (1990) 91 ALR 513 Skinner & Co v Perry (1893) 10 RPC 1 Sydney Cellulose Pty Ltd and Anor v Ceil Comfort Home Insulation Pty Ltd and Others (2001) 53 IPR 359 Vax Appliances Limited v Hoover plc [1991] FSR 307 Yamazaki Mazak Corporation v Interact Machine Tools (NSW) Pty Limited (1991) 22 IPR 79
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