Trade marks – counterfeit goods – respondents manifestly unbelievable – compensatory damages – additional damages
Author: Alan Nash
Patents – innovation patent – unjustified threats
Geographical indications – “Champagne Jayne” – promotion on Internet and social media – misleading and deceptive conduct
Scandinavian Tobacco Group Eersel BV v Trojan Trading Company Pty Ltd  FCA 1086 (9 October 2015) Trade marks – parallel importation – unpacking and repackaging due to tobacco labelling laws – whether...
Trade marks – objection to registration – deceptive similarity – likelihood of deception or confusion – MALTESERS vs MALTITOS
The Court has rejected an interlocutory application by the respondent in a shareholder class action for the appointment of “institutional” investors as sample group members on the basis that such a move was not necessary to “ensure justice is done” in the proceeding.
Written by Peter Heerey AM, QC, Tom Cordiner & Alan Nash. In the proceeding B. Braun Melsungen AG v Multigate Medical Devices Pty Ltd  FCA 1110, Pagone J held certain claims of two of B Braun’s patents for safety IV catheters valid and infringed by the conduct of Multigate. Both patents are for a safety needle protecting device for an intravenous catheter. Both claim the priority date of 12 June 1998 through the same chain of intermediate patents.
Written by Peter Heerey AM, QC, Tom Cordiner & Alan Nash. Where confidential information about a plan for corporate recapitalisation was disclosed and there was a subsequent development by the recipient and completion of the transaction without further recourse to discloser, the issue at trial was whether elements of confidentiality made out and whether equitable compensation is payable.
Case note written by Peter Heerey AM, QC, Tom Cordiner & Alan Nash. In Mastronardi Produce Ltd v Registrar of Trade Marks  FCA 1021 (19 September 2014) Justice Gordon has overturned a decision of the Registrar to reject the mark ZIMA in respect of tomatoes.
Written by Peter Heerey AM, QC, Tom Cordiner & Alan Nash. In Vertical Leisure Limited & Anor v Skyrunner Pty Ltd & Anor  FCCA 2033 (5 September 2014), the Federal Circuit Court has extended the record by awarding $300k in additional damages for infringement of Vertical Leisure’s X-POLE mark registered for pole-dancing poles. Vertical Leisure is the Australian and international market leader in respect of such products.
Case note by Peter Heerey AM, QC, Tom Cordiner & Alan Nash – Australian entities that pay royalties to foreign-based licensors are required to withhold and remit to the Australian Tax Office a portion of that royalty, except to the extent an international tax agreement between Australia and the relevant country provides otherwise.
Case note by Peter Heerey AM, QC, Tom Cordiner & Alan Nash: correspondents for South Australia, Victoria and Western Australia
Stylis and Commissioner of Patents  AATA 796 28 October 2014
The Administrative Appeals Tribunal has refused an application to review a particular decision of the Commissioner of Patents on the basis that the AAT lacks jurisdiction to review it.
Bennett, Greenwood and Middleton JJ unanimously upheld the primary judge’s decision in Miles v Commissioner of Patents  FCA 1017, a case involving a lapsing patent application.
Alphapharm submitted that, although AstraZeneca had succeeded, it had no need to litigate at all because Alphapharm had made it clear that it would desist from conduct of the kind that was alleged to be in infringement of patents, until such time as the result of the appeal in Ranbaxy was known. Nevertheless AstraZeneca commenced proceedings against Alphapharm. AstraZeneca submitted that not only was it entitled to its costs in the normal course, but also that those costs should be taxed on the special basis for which section 19(2) of the Patents Act provides.