Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Neurim Pharmaceuticals (1991) Ltd v Generic Partners Pty Ltd (No 4) [2020] FCA 1776 File number: NSD 656 of 2017
Judgment of: NICHOLAS J
Date of judgment: 11 December 2020
Catchwords: PATENTS – application to amend statement of claim to reformulate claim for additional damages under s 122(1A) of the Patents Act 1990 (Cth) – whether matters proposed to be relied upon by applicant reasonably capable of warranting award of additional damages – where no allegation made that respondents knew or had reason to believe that they were infringing patent – relevance of benefits alleged to have been obtained by respondents because of their alleged infringements
Legislation: Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) Copyright Amendment (Parallel Importation) Act 2003 (Cth) s 115(4) Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 37M Intellectual Property Laws Amendment Act 2006 (Cth) Patents Act 1990 (Cth) ss 105, 122(1), 122(1A) Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 (Cth) s 26B Copyright Act 1956 (UK) s 17(3)
Cases cited: Aon Risk Services Australia Ltd v Australian National University (2009) 239 CLR 175 Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd v D.A.P. Services (Kempsey) Pty Ltd (2007) 157 FCR 564 Cement Australia Pty Ltd v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (2010) 187 FCR 261 Neurim Pharmaceuticals (1991) Ltd v Generic Partners Pty Ltd (No 2) [2019] FCA 154; (2019) 139 IPR 424 Ravenscroft v Herbert [1980] RPC 193 Tamaya Resources Ltd (In Liq) v Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu (A Firm) (2016) 332 ALR 199
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