Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v Sandoz Pty Ltd [2021] FCA 947 File number(s): VID 63 of 2021
Judgment of: JAGOT J
Date of judgment: 12 August 2021
Catchwords: PATENTS – patent for treatment of diabetes – alleged threat of infringement – validity of extension of term of patent – pharmaceutical substance – construction of ss 71(2)(b) and 77 of the Patents Act 1990 (Cth) – patent extension invalid – application dismissed – cross-claim allowed.
Legislation: Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth) s 15AA Patents Act 1990 (Cth) ss 3, 13, 70, 71, 74, 76, 77, 78, 192
Explanatory Memorandum, Intellectual Property Laws Amendments Bill 1997 (Cth)
Cases cited: Director of Public Prosecutions v Leys [2012] VSCA 304; (2012) 44 VR 1 Inco Europe Ltd v First Choice Distribution [2000] UKHL 15; [2000] 1 WLR 586 Ono Pharmaceutical Co, Ltd v Commissioner of Patents [2021] FCA 643 Pfizer Corp v Commissioner of Patents [2006] FCAFC 190; (2006) 155 FCR 578 R v A2 [2019] HCA 35; (2019) ALR 214 R v Young [1999] NSWCA 166; (1999) 46 NSWLR 681 Taylor v Owners – Strata Plan No 11564 [2013] NSWCCA 55; (2013) 83 NSWLR 1 Taylor v The Owners – Strata Plan No 11564 [2014] HCA 9; (2014) 253 CLR 531 Wentworth Securities Ltd v Jones [1980] AC 74; [1917] 1 All ER 286
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