TCT Group Pty Ltd v Polaris IP Pty Ltd (No 2) [2023] FCA 284

Federal Court of Australia

TCT Group Pty Ltd v Polaris IP Pty Ltd (No 2) [2023] FCA 284 File number(s): NSD 1013 of 2020

Judgment of: BURLEY J

Date of judgment: 3 April 2023

Catchwords: COSTS – where respondents refused an offer of compromise – whether judgment is more favourable than the terms of the offer for the purposes of FCR 25.14(3) – whether amount of costs incurred at time of judgment compared to time of offer relevant to evaluation COSTS – discretion as to costs – whether costs order in favour of applicants should be discounted – where superfluous grounds of invalidity – where two out of four prior art documents advanced by applicants unnecessary – discount allowed

Legislation: Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) ss 37M, 37N, 43 Federal Court of Australia Rules 2011 (Cth) rr 1.35, 25.14(1), 25.14(2), 25.14(3), 40.30(b) Patents Act 1990 (Cth) s 128

Cases cited: Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd v Konami Australia Pty Ltd (No 4) [2022] FCA 1501 Damorgold Pty Ltd v Blindware Pty Ltd (No 2) [2018] FCA 364 Dometic Australia Pty Ltd v Houghton Leisure Products Pty Ltd (No 2) [2019] FCA 57 EMI Songs Australia Pty Ltd v Larrikin Music Publishing Pty Ltd [2011] FCAFC 92 Henley Arch Pty Ltd v Henley Constructions Pty Ltd (No 2) [2022] FCA 231 Idenix Pharmaceuticals LLC v Gilead Sciences Pty Ltd (No 2) [2018] FCAFC 7 Kismet International Pty Ltd v Guano Fertilizer Sales Pty Ltd (No 2) [2013] FCA 705 LFDB v SM (No 2) [2017] FCAFC 207 Sandoz Pty Ltd v H Lundbeck A/S (No 2) [2021] FCAFC 47 Stead v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd [2021] FCA 65 Sydney Equine Coaches Pty Ltd v Gorst [2017] FCAFC 34 TCT Group Pty Ltd v Polaris IP Pty Ltd [2022] FCA 1493 The State of Victoria v Sportsbet Pty Ltd (No 2) [2012] FCAFC 174